The Industry On In-Game Advertising

Gamasutra's weekly 'Ask The Industry' feature deals, this week, with the ever-increasingly relevant issue of the importance of in-game advertising. From the article: "I believe that advergaming will continue to be a growing significant segment of video games. As with movie and TV product placement, games that do a good job of it won't be considered an affront, those that don't will be panned by gamers and critics. It will be interesting to see how the current clash between the Writers Guild of America (and SAG) and product placement interests works out, and whether similar issues will arise between game designers and financial stakeholders in the future. -Kim Pallister, Microsoft Corp"

Comments

Why can't they just be honest?

[voice_of_all_reason]

Just say it. "We can get more money by putting advertisements in games, and it'll generate more revenue than we'll lose by alienating gamers."

Re:The Next Batch of Articles . . .

[BigDork1001]

You hosers from the previous game/art article want to know the definition of art? I can give you *one* of them:

Picaso never embedded a Wendy's ad in a painting.

Oh yeah, well this is considered art.

Re:I'm all for it

[Digital Vomit]

Oh, and to cut off the "they won't cut prices! they'll just make more money!" responses, of course prices will come down. That's the way the free market works.

I don't know what country you just stepped off the boat from, but you'll soon learn that's not the way things work here.

If company A can sell their game for $50 instead of $60, and thereby grab market share from company B, who has to charge $60, then of course company A will lower their prices.

Here's a more likely scenario: Company A realizes they can sell their game for $60, the same as company B, while making extra money selling ad space in the game. End of story.

If you think the inclusion of ads is going to reduce the cost of games, I've got a cable channel package to sell you.