NYT on In-Game Advertising
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 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.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
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.
"There's no success like failure, and failure's no success at all."
- Bob Dylan
FTA: ""If the character drinks a Pepsi to get health points, it doesn't bug me," Mr. Fisher said."
:) 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.
;)
I'm a fan of Pepsi. I prefer it. But drinking Pepsi for health points is probably the worst idea ever!
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...
Digital Sailor
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.
Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
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?
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.