Adverts in gaming

Boogle · 22 Oct 2006 at 23:00

Why do you specifically dislike adverts in games, to the point of refusing to buy a game on principle?

Games have had static adverts for quite some time now, with dynamic adverts coming in just recently. Development costs are rising by a great deal, but PC game prices have not risen. The development team size for UT2004 is many, many orders of magnitude higher than the team size for Quake 2. Due to Internet shops you may have even got UT2004 cheaper than Q2.

Now the publishers insist that prices will have to rise to cover the increased cost of developing games. Almost all gamers don't want this, so there are a few readily apparant solutions to the problem:

1. Like Gran Turismo on PS3, provide the basic game for full price (£50), then charge real money for the rest of the tracks and cars.

2. Insert advertisements into the game. Just like Sky have done since the beginning, you pay a subscription, and still have more adverts than terrestrial channels.

3. Make small episodic games that mask the high overall cost.

4. Make rubbishy games

Cronox · 22 Oct 2006 at 23:09

Personally I think, if done in the context of the game, advertising is a great way for developers/publishers to make some additional income. Sports games are the classic example as they have been doing this for years without hurting gameplay. Another good example is Test drive unlimited where you outfit your character with branded clothes, rather than generic t-shirt 27, it does nothing to hurt the gameplay and probably netted Eden/Atari some nice extra cash. If that extra cash is the difference between a sequel being made or the series ending I’m all for it.

Having played BF2142 over the weekend I think this whole thing has been blown up way too much. I’m not sure if they just haven’t been activated yet but I haven’t noticed a single ad yet.

Psypher5 · 22 Oct 2006 at 23:39

'cus they use spyware and hax0r us and steal my identity.. ?

Games like bf2142, need for speed, most games actually would IMO benifit from ads. You see ads everywhere, its the norm now. In proper context it would make games that step closer to realism.

Princey · 22 Oct 2006 at 23:40

I think it's a great idea, it just adds to the realism.

ps3ud0 · 23 Oct 2006 at 00:05

I think most people are against either inappropriate ads or software that data mines your preferences (with or without your knowledge) to allow it to decide whats the best ads to display.

I dont have any real issue with ads, as others have said it adds realism if done 'tastefully' (how ironic

) but Im not happy to release any personal information just to improve a relatively unimportant part of a game in an attempt to increase the revenue/profit of the developer/publisher...

Dynamic ads are fine but why the need to obtain stats to determine target audience - surely the type of game and where in the world you bought it should influence the ads you see. Yes for marketing its something very useful to know, but why should we accept such intrusion?

ps3ud0 :cool:

Darryn · 23 Oct 2006 at 00:08

Im all for ads, as has been said they add an element of realism to the games. If a subscription based game could be made cheaper by having the option to enable the ads id be all for it... this was once mentioned with Planetside, but i quit the game before the idea took off, if it ever did.

Darkwave · 23 Oct 2006 at 00:14

I am all for ad support if it's done right. For ad support to be done right you have to either enable the ability to turn it off or you have to pass on some of that profit to the customer as savings.

Anarchy Online was a fantastic success when it comes to the issue of in-game advertising. Not only did the advertisements fit the game environment, they allowed the developer and publisher to get rid of the subscription fee. We're talking about an MMORPG here, if ad support can rid an MMORPG of subscription fees then surely it can lower the cost of a normal game.

The problem I have with the likes of Battlefield 2142 is that not only will you be unable to turn it off (the leaflet tells you not to install the game if you object to that), you will also still be paying the full price of the game which is usually about £30 or £40 until the price drops some time after.

Boogle · 23 Oct 2006 at 00:27

Ulfhedjinn said:
I am all for ad support if it's done right. For ad support to be done right you have to either enable the ability to turn it off or you have to pass on some of that profit to the customer as savings.

Anarchy Online was a fantastic success when it comes to the issue of in-game advertising. Not only did the advertisements fit the game environment, they allowed the developer and publisher to get rid of the subscription fee. We're talking about an MMORPG here, if ad support can rid an MMORPG of subscription fees then surely it can lower the cost of a normal game.

But if you can disable the ads, then that defeats the whole purpose doesn't it? What if your example of Anarchy Online allowed you to disable ads? The savings are implied from the rising dev costs, the savings are not increasing prices. How much does an Xbox 360 game or PS3 game cost currently? How much does the very same game cost on the PC? Prices will either have to increase to next-gen console levels, or another solution will have to be found.

Lets face it, if you could disable ads on TV (even if it was hard to do) - everyone would do it. If you don't want ads, there 3 other options I've provided, and probably some more you can contribute.

Darkwave · 23 Oct 2006 at 00:32

Boogle said:
But if you can disable the ads, then that defeats the whole purpose doesn't it? What if your example of Anarchy Online allowed you to disable ads?

The Anarchy Online people got rid of the subscription fees, I don't really think you can ask for more than that really. If they gave you the option of disabling ads then I would have paid the subscription because I wouldn't be getting ads.

Boogle said:
The savings are implied from the rising dev costs, the savings are not increasing prices. How much does an Xbox 360 game or PS3 game cost currently? How much does the very same game cost on the PC? Prices will either have to increase to next-gen console levels, or another solution will have to be found.

I never said that ad support is going to increase the cost of the game, I said that the game is not going to get cheaper even though it will have ad support. I for one consider that being milked.

Boogle said:
Lets face it, if you could disable ads on TV (even if it was hard to do) - everyone would do it. If you don't want ads, there 3 other options I've provided, and probably some more you can contribute.

Sky Movies does not have ads in their movies. They could easily do, but I would expect to pay less for the bolt-on for those particular channels if they did.

Since they added Film4 as a free channel, they have also added an ad (between movies) that says "Sky Movies doesn't have ads, so we don't interrupt your movie" or whatever. They're making a big deal out of that because they know people paying extra don't want something like ads.

ps3ud0 · 23 Oct 2006 at 00:34

Boogle said:
Lets face it, if you could disable ads on TV (even if it was hard to do) - everyone would do it. If you don't want ads, there 3 other options I've provided, and probably some more you can contribute.

I remember that VCR that automatically removed ad breaks when it was recording - was banned in Europe way before it was attempted to be released due to the implications it had on tv programming.

I agree that disabling in-game ads would be pointless - perhaps devs could allow 2 tiers of (one-off) charging (say via a special unique key) for gamers who do/dont want ads. Im sure some gamers who object to ads would pay a nominal fee for the privilege - such a setup wouldnt be that hard to implement either...

ps3ud0 :cool:

[TW]Fox · 23 Oct 2006 at 00:43

I don't actually mind them if they suit the game. Racing games with no adverts, for example, are quite naff.

Boogle · 23 Oct 2006 at 00:46

Ulfhedjinn said:
I never said that ad support is going to increase the cost of the game, I said that the game is not going to get cheaper even though it will have ad support. I for one consider that being milked.

Please read what I said. I said game costs are increasing (as they have for next-gen consoles), and by having ads, it stops the same increase happening on the PC. Xbox 360 game: ~£40. PC game: ~£25.

Cronox · 23 Oct 2006 at 00:47

ps3ud0 said:
I agree that disabling in-game ads would be pointless - perhaps devs could allow 2 tiers of (one-off) charging (say via a special unique key) for gamers who do/dont want ads. Im sure some gamers who object to ads would pay a nominal fee for the privilege - such a setup wouldnt be that hard to implement either...

ps3ud0

It would be interesting if a game like BF2142 was released in two different versions, one with ads and one without ads costing an extra, say, £10. Personally I would pick the ad-supported option but as you say giving gamers choice is the best option.

I don't really buy the it's not any cheaper with ads argument. It's well documented that development costs on a-list titles are rising, console releases now cost far more than PC titles for the exact same game. Not to mention inflation, where by technically anything that isn't increasing in price over time is actually getting cheaper relative to average income and the cost of other items, so games, on the PC at least, are in fact getting cheaper.

Darkwave · 23 Oct 2006 at 00:57

Boogle said:
Please read what I said. I said game costs are increasing (as they have for next-gen consoles), and by having ads, it stops the same increase happening on the PC. Xbox 360 game: ~£40. PC game: ~£25.

You're saying that PC games prices aren't increasing because of ad support? BF2142 is one of the only games I can think of that has mandatory ad support so you're making absolutely no sense whatsoever there.

As for console game prices, I find them astonishingly stupid personally. Considering their code is much more optimised purely by the nature of console hardware, they require less patching and less troubleshooting, so in a logical world console games would cost less if anything.

Also, you said BF2142 was £27.99 at launch in the thread about "THE FACTS" of BF2142 advertising. That's closer to £30 than it is to £25, so please make up your mind.

ps3ud0 · 23 Oct 2006 at 01:16

Ulfhedjinn said:
You're saying that PC games prices aren't increasing because of ad support? BF2142 is one of the only games I can think of that has mandatory ad support so you're making absolutely no sense whatsoever there.

As for console game prices, I find them astonishingly stupid personally. Considering their code is much more optimised purely by the nature of console hardware, they require less patching and less troubleshooting, so in a logical world console games would cost less if anything.

Also, you said BF2142 was £27.99 at launch in the thread about "THE FACTS" of BF2142 advertising. That's closer to £30 than it is to £25, so please make up your mind.

Please lets not make this petty...

I agree that the only logical assumption can be that if game development is costing more then eventually this will have to be transferred to the consumer rather than absorbed by the publisher. If enabling ads alleviates this then I guess that it could be a good solution, just not the only one.

Console game prices are mainly only higher due to artifical pricing by console manus to ensure that when you buy into the platform (usually at loss or minimal profit) they can maximise revenue by 'marking up' the games. As you said console games should really be cheaper due to either simplicity in design/coding or just plain 'economies of scale' compared to PC gaming - but shussh thats our secret

ps3ud0

Sleepery · 23 Oct 2006 at 10:06

I would love to see the results of the first month of ad data from BF2142. I imagine the reason they want to track how long you look at ads is because they have no clue just how effective they are going to be.

I've been playing 2142 religiously since Friday, and I tend to be so wrapped up in the game that I haven't even noticed any ads, let alone stared at them for any length of time. Advertising in games won't be a done deal unless it bring in additional revenue to the companies advertising the products.

For me, in game ads will either be not noticed, or if they're intrusive or out of context, ruining the immersion, in which case they'll have a negative impact and ensure that I never touch the product in question.

Darkwave · 23 Oct 2006 at 10:17

Sleepery said:
I would love to see the results of the first month of ad data from BF2142. I imagine the reason they want to track how long you look at ads is because they have no clue just how effective they are going to be.

That's more or less correct, they don't know how effective the in-game ad support for BF2142 is going to be, but the main reason they have a system of tracking how long you looked, from how far away and at which angle is mainly because the company placing the ad will pay more for it to be put in a more noticeable position and they will probably also pay more if more people look at it (the same way banner ads work on websites, the more you click the more revenue for the site from referals.)

Sleepery said:
I've been playing 2142 religiously since Friday, and I tend to be so wrapped up in the game that I haven't even noticed any ads, let alone stared at them for any length of time. Advertising in games won't be a done deal unless it bring in additional revenue to the companies advertising the products.

According to some people here, the ads aren't even in yet. This would explain why you have not seen any.

Supposedly one of the maps is to have thirty of them, so I don't think it will be hard to see them.

afraser2k · 23 Oct 2006 at 10:41

Some games it will be fine to have adverts in them, like sports titles where you're used to sponsors or advertising boards. I won't like them in some games like, say, FPS titles as it could distract me from the action or affect performance if it decides to update the ads in-game and the server can't be found (for whatever reason).

The main thing I'm worried about it privacy as some gaming companies have had a very poor privacy protection record. These companies are also more likely to use foreign call centres that might not have as strict rules as the EU for privacy protection.

I'm also against paying full price for a game and then having to put up with advertising. If it was half the normal retail then it wouldn't be so bad.

There's also a concern that once a developer has ended support for a game (like EA does with new editions) what happens with the in-game advertising system for the old title? Does it get made ad-free with a patch or will we have problems if the game can't find the advert server as it hasn't been updated?

Darkwave · 23 Oct 2006 at 11:41

afraser2k said:
I'm also against paying full price for a game and then having to put up with advertising. If it was half the normal retail then it wouldn't be so bad.

That's exactly my problem with it, but it seems I am getting lynched for it. I don't see why I should have to pay nearly £30 for a game with compulsory ad support when I buy other games for the same price without it.

All it will do is make me look at other games really.

If you could have a simple check-box option to disable the ads then I wouldn't be complaining at all, but according to people on this forum that either involves too much work or EA needs the extra money from advertising to pay the staff (yeah, right.)

Psypher5 · 23 Oct 2006 at 11:52

At everyone whos moaning about the price, then its your own fault.

It was to be had for MONTHs at well under 20quid. If you payed 30, and want to moan about the price then its a pretty poor argument.