Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

NYT on In-Game Advertising 100

Posted by Zonk from the splinter-sell dept.
The New York Times has a piece on in-game advertising, likely sparked by the installment of RL billboards in Anarchy Online. They discuss the ways in which ads are placed into games and the possible negative reactions from game players as a result of advertising in entertainment they've already purchased. From the article: "I don't want to pick up a sword and have it read Nike on the side..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NYT on In-Game Advertising More

NYT on In-Game Advertising

Comments Filter:

  • Product placements (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AtariAmarok ( 451306 ) on Sunday April 10, 2005 @09:46PM (#12197308)
    I think much of the product placements in television are appropriate. Often, it makes the shows look more "real": those kids in Home Improvement would have been more likely to drink Coke or Pepsi, instead of the fakey looking generic "cola" with the Pepsi-like can they had in the show. It was distracting.

    This being said, such product placements would actually detract from most games, such as fantasy games. In GTA it would improve the look: a real city would have real products on billboards. However, I don't think it would add to the "Lord of the Rings" games to have Verizon "The One Ring Tone" cell phone ads in Tengwar etched on the Ring, or Citibank emblazoned across planet surfaces in Star Trek fleet combat games.

    • Re:Product placements (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jolande ( 852630 ) on Sunday April 10, 2005 @09:55PM (#12197355)
      I agree with you to a point. Weird generic branded cola cans in movies can be a real eye sore. But at the same time, when every single can in a movie is a Pepsi product, it becomes irritating. Furthermore, when you only see Pepsi products, Frito-Lay products, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, and KFC in a movie, it becomes just as distracting as somebody drinking a generic cola. This makes a world even less authentic. And it is more distracting because you keep feeling like you are being sold to. So let's recap. Pepsi can in a movie, fine. Every can in the movie a Pepsi can, not file.
      • Mod that insightful. It does go the other way.

        I did see an oddity in Smallville recently. A major car company, not GM, advertises during the show. Most of the cars seen are from this company. Don't ask what the company is: I just do not remember it (real effective placement, heh).

        But then in this episode I see Lois Lane driving a GMC-brand SUV with a big GMC logo on the grill. Later on in the same episode, the logo was actually removed from the grill, to make it a "generic" car. I sure remember the vani

        • Re:Lois Lane and the vanishing logo. (Score:5, Interesting)

          by jackbird ( 721605 ) on Monday April 11, 2005 @05:57AM (#12199030)
          The New Yorker had an article a couple of weeks ago that talked about this phenomenon. Apparently advertisers are being involved now at the level of producing and writing the shows. For example, Ford is apparently deeply involved in American Dreams (a drama set in late 1960s America), and they coordinated an episode where the plot revolved around a Mustang with the launch of their new model year. This goes well beyond simple product placement (but I guess falls short of The Disney Channel, although there you know what you're getting yourself into).
      • and how about the unusual amount of Mac screens seen in movies and TV ...
        • I hadn't noticed one way or another...
        • I believe (sorry, no reference handy) that this is mostly for aesthetics, not advertising dollars from Apple they look better than the generic PC parts. You'll note that you almost never see a Mac OS X GUI (or any other recognizable GUI for that matter... "I know this... this is UNIX...").

          I've seen a lot of obviously Apple PowerBooks in shows/movies with a big sticker over the Apple logo on the back of the screen. Clearly not product placement.
        • Extreme Makeover: Home Edition has a lot of PowerBooks because much of the software they use runs better (only?) on the Mac. I have noticed, though, that they have a sticker on the Apple logo. I think it's because the show is basically a Sears-fest, and Sears doesn't carry PowerBooks.

          Maybe a reason for the "unusual amount" is that Macs are popular among filmmakers, artists, and musicians. These are the types of people involved in making movies, videos and TV shows.

          PS. My old roommate was a MacAddict.

      • I see what you are getting at with the Pizza Hut, Taco Bell and KFC comments...

        But, Pepsico no longer owns Taco Bell, KFC and Pizza Hut. Those restaurants were spun-off in 1997 to form Tricon. Pepsico wanted to get out of the restaurant business.

        Then, when Long John Silvers and the A&W's were added, they changed the name of the company to Yum! Brands.
      • I can think of some TV PPs that made me cringe. "Seinfeld" jumps to mind. I recall seeing Jason Alexander (George) standing in Jerry's apt in one show with a bag of Rold Gold pretzels, oh so coincidentally facing the camera square on. This was at a time when he was doing ads for them on TV. That struck me as obvious and sleazy, like some sort of advertising conspiracy.

        I think the worst one ever though was when AMC got their clunky cars in the James Bond movie "The Man With the Golden Gun". Yah, nothin
    • I think much of the product placements in television are appropriate. Often, it makes the shows look more "real": those kids in Home Improvement would have been more likely to drink Coke or Pepsi, instead of the fakey looking generic "cola" with the Pepsi-like can they had in the show. It was distracting.

      Don't they have to be careful with product placement in a TV show because an advertiser on the network might drop their advertising during commercial breaks if a competitor's brand appears in the show?
    • Exactly- as long as the ads fit into the game's universe, they're fine. I actually bought the Jak & Daxter games partially because there were billboards for them in one of the cities in Ratchet & Clank 2, and the credits revealed Insomniac (R&C) was using Naughty Dog (J&D)'s rendering engine.
    • Personally, whenever I see any product brand, it takes me out of the money, but then again, that has a lot to do with me being a former hyper-analytical creative writing major who took a lot of media studies courses. Unrecognizable brand names and generic (ie: no-name) brands are quite common. When you're creating a work of art, every detail is important, and to use big brands as THE choice of a given product says either that you believe in a world where the average person only buys products from the corpor
    • I agree with you to a certain point. Yes putting ads in a game like GTA would enhance the "realism" of said game. Placing ads like Reebok on my new boots of speed would look nifty and funny at the same time. Being in the advertising industry, the idea is great but the game in me says that moderation should be practiced if we are going into such an endeavor. My take would be that ads should be limited to games that are appropriate of ad. (e.g. GTA) But games that don't need such ads should be left well alon

    • There's also a matter of how the images are presented.

      If the character would have a reason to be drinking a "cola" and happened to drink a Pepsi, fine. If the cola-drinking had no place in the plot, and suddenly the character grabbed a can, rotated it so the label faced out, drank a big gulp, made a satisfying "aaaah" sound, while the camera zoomed in on the label... that's whoring.

      ABC's "Alias" is sponsored by Ford, and they only use Ford vehicles in the show. Most of the time you don't even notic

  • Anarchy Online (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Staplerh ( 806722 ) on Sunday April 10, 2005 @09:54PM (#12197353) Homepage
    Just before people jump on the bashing Anarchy Online bandwagon, I just wanted to remind readers that Anarchy Online's advertisements are only for those who are taking advantage of their free-play initiative. Paying subscribers do not see the advertisements.

    Seems to make sense to me.

    That being said, I do think that contemporary advertisements are out of place in MMORPGs that do not take place in a contemporary environment! The case of the 'Nike Sword' is an apt analogy, as nothing would shatter the illusion of 'reality' (for whatever thats worse) anything more than an extremely ill-planned product placement.
    • Exactly... as long as the ads fit into the world, and result in players getting to play for free, or at least at a dramatic discount, I don't see the problem. If you're paying full price, you're making it a clear statement that it's worth that much for you not to see any ads.

      The whole ads for free, or none for pay doesn't always work properly though... I used to have an IGN insider account and I still had about half the ads showing up. It really pissed me off. Of course, then again... the only reason I e
    • Nike is the Greek goddess of Victory. It seems appropriate that she have a sword in a fantacy game.
    • I've been playing under AO's free plan, and have barely noticed the billboards. There have been billboards up for as long as I've played the game, but before the advertised popular cars, guns, and tourist attractions in-game, they're just replaced now.

    • Re:Anarchy Online (Score:4, Insightful)

      by b1t r0t ( 216468 ) on Monday April 11, 2005 @01:50PM (#12203574)
      Paying subscribers do not see the advertisements.

      They don't now. Who's to say that one day some bean counter won't decide that they should be turned on for everyone?

  • Two Tiers? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MBraynard ( 653724 ) on Sunday April 10, 2005 @09:55PM (#12197356) Journal
    Much like /. turns off adverts for subscribers, perhaps these MMORPGs can have two tiers of subscribers. Those who pay a lower/free fee and see some adverts in-game, and those who pay a premium not to see them.

    As someone who works in a marketing related field, I can say how excited I am at the possibility to narrowcast to individuals. Perhaps these ingame ads can be player-sensitive? For women players, they see soap advertisements while guys see adverts for pickups.

    • A two-tiered system would make it easier for someone to figure out how to disable the ads in the lower system (sort of like blocking pop-ups).
      • Not true - blocking popups was happening regardless of two tiered systems.

        The way most of these games work is that the textures are on your harddrive. So if the adverts were driven by textures, you could edit them to look however you wanted.

        If the ads were served like banners in-game, the server could better disguise them as game data. While you might be able to block that out, they may be able to change things up frequently enough packetwise. Also, if you blocked out the banners, you'd see a lot of large

    • Re:Two Tiers? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Reignking ( 832642 )
      Wow, there's someone else in marketing on Slashdot? :) I wholeheartedly agree -- one of the biggest dilemmas facing marketers these days is ROI and how to most effectively reached the inteneded audience. Not only is this measureable, but you have a good sense as to who is seeing the ads. As for recall and driving the consumer to purchase, that's another story...

      BTW, it was brought up here, and in the AO Sprite Ad thread [slashdot.org] that paying subscribers to AO do not see the ads...

  • Ah I see you have a Nike sword. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 10, 2005 @09:55PM (#12197357)
    I have a Hush Puppies Hand Gun with silencer of course.

  • If the shoe fits, wear it... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MMaestro ( 585010 ) on Sunday April 10, 2005 @10:02PM (#12197394)
    If it doesn't fit, don't force it on. As long as the advertisement don't seem out of context, Coke and Pepsi signs in Everquest? Uh uh. In The Matrix Online? I can accept that. Simple as that.

    Obviously there are problems in some cases (what are you going to advertise in a world like World of Warcraft?) but thats a problem for another discussion.

  • PEPSI?! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by soniCron88 ( 870042 ) on Sunday April 10, 2005 @10:02PM (#12197395) Homepage
    FTA: ""If the character drinks a Pepsi to get health points, it doesn't bug me," Mr. Fisher said."

    I'm a fan of Pepsi. I prefer it. But drinking Pepsi for health points is probably the worst idea ever! :) It's one thing to eat a hearty turkey and gain some benefit, but Pepsi...? Maybe increase speed a little, but even there, adrenaline packs or something would be a better design decision.

    Either way, fanboys, it doesn't really matter what we think of the idea. They're going to be a huge part of video gaming in the future, and there's nothing we can do about it. It's already taken over television (which, frankly, probably wouldn't exist without it), radio, movies, magazines. Basically every source of entertainment. Except books. But even there, they tend to advertise their own products on the last few pages, or the cover. But, as long as it's not annoying, I can't imagine many people would have a problem with it. We may even see some interesting ads:

    "Pepsi Cola - Neo's beverage of choice! Try one today!"

    Or, maybe that would suck too... ;)

    • Re:PEPSI?! (Score:4, Funny)

      by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Sunday April 10, 2005 @10:41PM (#12197591) Homepage Journal
      "I'm a fan of Pepsi. I prefer it. But drinking Pepsi for health points is probably the worst idea ever! :) It's one thing to eat a hearty turkey and gain some benefit, but Pepsi...? Maybe increase speed a little, but even there, adrenaline packs or something would be a better design decision."

      Heh. This point would be more interesting if soda wasn't a common form of health regen for games. San Andreas comes to mind. I had a major shootout with a bunch of cops. My health was almost gone, but I managed to get to a soda machine. I drank two or three sodas (err somehow I didn't get shot during this, not sure if I could have) and all the damage done by a barrage of bullets was gone.

      At that point, whether or not it was Pepsi C.J. was drinking was not the big question.
    • "Pepsi Cola - Neo's beverage of choice! Try one today!"

      Technically, that's Powerade [penny-arcade.com].

      Don't get me started on Enter The Matrix (too late). 70 hallways of bland gray walls pierced only with giant blue Powerade vending machines. That's video game product placement gone wrong.
    • I'm a fan of Pepsi. I prefer it. But drinking Pepsi for health points is probably the worst idea ever!

      Dont play Parasite Eve 2, you drink coka cola at some points to get health

    • It's one thing to eat a hearty turkey and gain some benefit

      Be sure to shoot the turkey with your ray-gun first. Cooking it will double the healing level.

  • Frankly, I'm all for it (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Sunday April 10, 2005 @10:45PM (#12197611) Homepage Journal
    Truth be told, I'd like to see in-game advertising take off. It'd be nice for game companies to get another source of revenue going in a crowded market. Potentially, it could mean for more creative or ambitious games.

    As for the adverts being annoying, all I have to say is this: It won't take much to get a bad review in a mag over it. Supply and demand means they shouldn't blow it.
    • That's all well and good to say, get the developers more money. I'm all for it too, if that would allow them to reduce the monthly costs for MMOs. But as it stands it's not benefitting the paying customers anything to walk around in Matrix Online, for instance, and see advertisements for Constantine and the upcoming Batman movie.
    • > Potentially, it could mean for more creative or ambitious games.

      That is the funniest thing I've ever heard.

    • Because product placement has meant more creative and ambitions movies? Maybe you didn't see the preview that got posted yesterday for the Hitch Hiker's Guide movie? "Ford, this is terrible. We're getting thrown out of an alien spacecraft and I can't get a connection on my Nokia phone!" The point is, product placements have never improved anything. Companies throw together crappy movies and turn them into one big advertisement. What was The Italian Job if not a mini cooper advertisement?
      • What was The Italian Job if not a mini cooper advertisement?

        Excellent, "buzzworthy" product placement. Additionally, the original (1969) movie used them, as well [joeythefilmgeek.com].
      • What was The Italian Job if not a mini cooper advertisement?

        Wrong. In that case, the product was driven by the plot. The director wanted an indoor car-chase, and the mini-coop was the most plausible way to make it happen. There was no other car with the dimensions needed.

        May as well call True Lies [imdb.com] a Harrier [fas.org] advertisement...
        • No, there are even better options. You ever seen a Yugo? My city had some mild excitement when somebody drove one around the mall in the early morning. He didn't even damage the double doors comming in. They're capable of pretty impressive speed, too, if they've been modified. The one that flipped off the Mackinaw bridge was going faster than my Lumina can and accellerating.

  • The Problems with In-game Ads (Score:5, Insightful)

    by miyako ( 632510 ) <miyako AT gmail DOT com> on Sunday April 10, 2005 @11:33PM (#12197781) Homepage Journal
    I think that the problem with in-game ads is that at first it's all well and good to see ad's when you play for free in a game with a setting that's condusive to seeing ads, pretty soon they will start to creep into subscription based games where they don't fit at all.
    The first time I ever recall seing product placement in a game was in the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2 arcade game, with pizza hut billboards, this fit the game, as the characters were walking around a city where billboards would be common, and pizza was a big theme in the show anyway.
    The most vivid recollection of product-placement that I can remember was in Jet Moto for PSX, with Mountain Dew billboards, which also fit.
    I agree with the sentiments that I've seen from other posts that in these types of games, product placement can make the game feel more authentic. Even banner ads not actually in the game would be fine if it allowed me to play a game for free (especially if it was a preview so I could decide if I wanted to pay a monthly fee).
    What worries me is what happenes when game makers realize that they can make even more money by charging a monthly fee AND including product placement. How long until we see ads in loading screens (and reduce the incentive for game makers to reduce loading time), how long until we start seeing spam in our in-game message boxes, or have to complete a quest by punching the monkey.
    • Like Warner Bros. is doing with The Matrix Online? They have billboards in the game for their movies, even the paying subscribers see them, unlike in AO where the freebie players are the only ones to see their ads.

  • Frankly, I'm totally against it. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Drek ( 23194 ) <timjump&gmail,com> on Monday April 11, 2005 @12:38AM (#12198049)
    Okay, I can understand Anarchy Online's form of advertising: you're using our product for free, you're going to see the occasional Sprite or Motley Crue billboard. I could also understand some product placement being thrown into the cheaper games, i.e. this game only costs $20 but all the soda machines in the game are Coke-branded. But when new games cost $50 and there's talk of the next generation of console games costing even MORE, why should we have to pay that much and STILL have advertising?

    Although I do agree that the well-placed ad (billboards, soda-machines, etc.) can increase the authenticity of a modern-themed game, I think it's more a sad statement on how raped our society has become by these money-hungry bastards. But the worst part is that we all know it won't stop there. I can imagine five years from now we'll be playing a fantasy-themed RPG and every time we level up, we'll have to sit through 2 minutes of commercials just like TV.

    I am bombarded with advertising in every facet of life. Why do I have to be force-fed even more ads during my favorite form of escapism?
    • "Why do I have to be force-fed even more ads during my favorite form of escapism?"

      Because it won't annoy you enough to quit. They'll dish out as much advertising as they can, and when they find the sweet spot where they're annoying most people _almost_ enough to quit their game, then they'll stop increasing it.
    • I am bombarded with advertising in every facet of life. Why do I have to be force-fed even more ads during my favorite form of escapism?

      I couldn't agree more. And here's something else to think about...

      Ok, games now have ads. As long as the ads make sense for the game, it won't be to intrusive for most players. BUT, not all game styles/genres are condusive to "natural"-feeling advertising, the most notable being fantasy games such as Warcraft, LOTR, Diablo, D&D, etc. Real-word advertising just doe

  • NYT has ads, why not games? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AHumbleOpinion ( 546848 ) on Monday April 11, 2005 @01:38AM (#12198270) Homepage
    Publishing is expensive, ads are supposed to defray the cost and save the customer a little money. If this is true for the NYT why would it not be true for games? If they are as ignorable as ads in the newspaper then fine, something like wall posters or billboards. Product placement like in TV and movies, fine as long as it makes sense in the context of the plot/action. A character wearing a Nike t-shirt would not be the end of the world, its not like you don't see that on the street a hundred times a day. If the brand is being artificially pushed in front of your face that's a different story. Having to make a Del Taco run every time your characters gets low on hit points would be bad.

  • Nike logo on boots, blades would have Gillette (Score:5, Funny)

    by AHumbleOpinion ( 546848 ) on Monday April 11, 2005 @01:44AM (#12198295) Homepage
    "I don't want to pick up a sword and have it read Nike on the side..."

    The Nike logo would be on the boots. The blade would probably be brought to you by Gillette or Remington.

  • My thoughts (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 ) on Monday April 11, 2005 @02:12AM (#12198400) Homepage
    I preface this by saying I'm in the advertising industry. Now, that being said, I think that this is great, but needs some restrictions.

    Obviously there is the player concern about it being "world appropriate". Ie. having an ad on a sword in EQ would not, while billboards in AO are. To those worried about this, I say relax. People in advertising are WELL aware of your concerns (trust me, we're not stupid) and most likely would never do this unless they had a DAMN good reason.

    Now, I think its only a matter of time before these become clickable and maybe open a pop-under ad that you see once you close the game. If that ever happens and they move from passive ads to interactive ads, I think they should be clearly labeled as such with some text stating that it is a "sponsored ad" just so there's no confusion.

    Other than that, in-game ads are here to stay, and look forward to advertisers grabbing every available in-game space, especially once word gets around about how more men are playing video games than watching tv. Although I wouldn't be surprised if someone creative invents a 3rd party in-game popup blocker.

    • Re:My thoughts (Score:5, Interesting)

      by geminidomino ( 614729 ) * on Monday April 11, 2005 @02:39AM (#12198487) Journal
      People in advertising are WELL aware of your concerns (trust me, we're not stupid) and most likely would never do this unless they had a DAMN good reason.

      Yeah, like someone offered them US$0.005 per "impression".

      People in advertising may or may not be stupid, but the advertising industry in general has gone from "informing potential customers" to "scatterbomb every available eyeball whether they want to see it or not"

      So I hope you'll pardon me if I don't show a whole lot of faith in the good graces of ad companies not to destroy my gaming experience to make a few bucks...
      • The ad companies can only mess up your game if the publishers and developers allow it.
      • Please try to keep in mind that most of the reputable agencies around are also well aware of how pissed off people are at ad clutter. Unfortunately, a few agencies who "don't get it" ruin the industry image for the rest of us.

        Fortunately, its starting to hit the industry as a whole that since there is a ridiculous overflow of ads, that the quality has to improve to make you stand out.

  • Ad Attention (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    You've got to wonder how this will affect a players attention to detail. Most people these days naturally ignore ads on websites, commercials on TV, billboards while driving, etc...In game, much of the time we're required to notice ever detail or we may miss something.

    Advertisers/developers are placing content in game that people have a tendency to want to ignore. It's not like you're going to mute the game, and you do want to pay attention. What's a gamer to do?

    Kind of the same subject, I don't care if h

  • EA is worse for adverts I have seen. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Zeussy ( 868062 ) on Monday April 11, 2005 @02:38AM (#12198482) Homepage
    Play Burnout 3 and drive around slowly. Theres PGA 2005 Golf Billboards, Need For Speed Underground 2 Billboards. Battlefield Billboards. Axe Deodorant Billboards which is the one that looks most inkeeping, even on a Cold Snow covered track.

    I find they really detract from the game, With all these damn EA Game Billboards over the place. Its bad enough with they're slogan:
    "EA Games, Challenge Everything"
    Makes me think of Gamers playing chicken with an oncoming bus in a supermarket trolley. But then it is a game where you are doing almost 200mph most of the time you don't really see them. A lot of people don't.

    • Drive slowly in Burnout 3? Isn't that kinda defeating the purpose of playing the game?

      But seriously. The more I see ads like that in games, the more comfortable I feel not paying for them.

      All I know is that the vast majority of ads in the future will be delivered over the network, not included in in-game texture files, and I'll either be using or developing software that blocks and/or modifies the data so that I don't see the ads.

      My game machine, my eyeballs, my ads.

  • Mr. Davis said the publishers could eventually get ad revenue of $1 to $2 on each game sold. Ms. Madrid, however, said it was far too soon to know whether the partnership would lead to significant revenues.

    Interesting estimates for a company who "will be in 40 games by year's end." Anyone know if these estimates are reasonable?

  • What some are failing to spot is that these ad-supported games come with a free, geek-game included.

    Yes folks, included in the box - your opportunity to take part in blacklisting the ad-servers for GameX at your firewall or gateway.

    Some smart startup could knock up a small program that would download definitions on a regular basis, keeping all those nefarious ads out of your box.

    Of course, you couldn't just write something like that and give it away for free - the bandwidth for the defs would eventually
  • The ad market is dying.

    Cable killed commercial tv long ago. TiVo is putting the stake in it.

    Radio was killed simply by the presets. Satellite will put the stake in that.

    Internet? get real. AdSubtract works great for banners. Pop up ads are long gone.

    So games? We we have been buying our games ad free for years. Before "they" even realized we existed.

    So now, with everything else dying, they want to infiltrate our games?

    The games we just spent $50 for? The publishers are selling our 'play time' we bought

    • The ad market is dying.

      Cable killed commercial tv long ago. TiVo is putting the stake in it.

      First of all, isn't doing so well right now. Sure they've just signed some deals with cable companies but they're whole commercial skipping thing is probably not going to be allowed.

      Secondly, do you even have cable? Commercials flood that thing just about as much as broadbast. The worst is when you're watching a show and you hear some non-setting sounds followed by some icons appearing at the bottom of the sc

      • True, it may be that the revenge of the advertisers will ultimately succeed in TV land, but at that point, there is and will be so many other things to do - watch a movie, play a game, listen to ipod, listen to sat. radio, surf the net, even read a book imagine that... that TV will continue to just be an option.
  • The rise of in-game adverstising is just more proof that video games have arrived on the scene as mainstream entertainment in the same way as movies and television. People are going to complain at first,"why should I pay $50 for a game and have to suffer ads?" But don't we already pay in excess of $50 per month on average for cable tv and still have to watch ads? Advertising is not going to go away, and the fact that a large and desireable demographic is spending a lot of time playing video games rather tha
    • would be better to go the other way for MMO and other fantasy games, license certain game element names and liknesses to existing companies (Guinness Minotaur Hero's Brew?)

    • But don't we already pay in excess of $50 per month on average for cable tv and still have to watch ads?

      The difference is, networks and show production companies are usually not reimbursed by cable distributors who package up their programming. If they want to produce those shows you pay the cable company to watch, they gotta get the revenue somewhere. Commercials, product placement, sponsorship...

      Presumably, the money you pay for a game goes to the game 'owner', be it the company who produced it

  • Funny, everyone called it an Easter Egg when Lucas Arts advertised other games inside ones you were playing. Like "Grim Fandango" in "Escape from Monkey Island". I think they did that with the first or second MI game with Loom, or that could have been the other way around.

    I guess this is just another thing to blame on George Lucas...
    • Secret of Monkey Island... one of the pirates in the Scumm Bar had a pin on that read "Ask me about LOOM" and would launch into a huge sales pitch for the game if you inquired about it. Pretty funny and smart.

      • Xenosaga did something like that, the main character would get e-mails talking about how great Namco's other games were. Only the ads weren't amusing at all and they really broke up the atmosphere of a game that only had atmosphere going for it.

        I could tolerate more in-game advertising if it was consistently made in some way entertaining and appropriate to the game. But I imagine it frequently won't be.

  • I don't really have a problem with in game advertising as long as it's relevant to the game itself. A modern day advert in a game like GTA doesn't seem all that terrible. I could go without seeing a Budweiser poster in WoW though. ;)

Slashdot Top Deals

"Imitation is the sincerest form of television." -- The New Mighty Mouse

Close