Hi, don't sell out like EA did (in game advertising)

(Ifurita) #61

I’d think that in-game advertising would be more effective if the ads blended in the with environment - that way players would see them, but it would be a natural fit with the map.

(ouroboro) #62

That may be true, but the question remains: why? Let’s examine the possibilities:

Assuming piracy is relatively low, if a developer cannot recoup their costs and make a profit through retail sales alone, I’d suggest their game most likely sucks. In that case, introducing ads doesn’t make sense because they won’t be seen.

On the other hand, the more successful a game is, the less need there is for ads (you’re already making a bundle on sales), and the more offensive those ads will be. This is a dangerous move, because you risk alienating a great number of your customers – your very bread and butter.

Therefore, the only logical explanation for introducing ads into a successful game is the desire to drive a Ferrari. :moo:

Now, if a game which has ads from day one were to become successful in spite of those ads, we’d have another story, but this is a huge gamble to take. It might work if you were to hype the game to the heavens without ever mentioning ads, then cross your fingers and hope that after selling a gazillion copies you could retain enough players to make the game a success. But lying to people tends to piss them off, so it better be one hell of a game.

I wouldn’t risk it. I’d rather take the time to make a great game, and trust that consumers know a quality product when they see one, and will clamor to buy it. This “strategy” is as old as money, and has the added benefit of showing respect to your customers, which creates feverish loyalty that remains even if you release a turd now and then (see id Software).

(SCi-Fi) #63

I think that if advertising boards were put up in Quake Wars then can we
have a destructable one, as it be one of the 1st to be shot at or blown up :twisted:

(SCDS_reyalP) #64

That’s a false assumption. Production costs are rising, while retail prices are barely keeping pace with inflation. Triple A titles have cost $50-$60 on release for about as long as I can remember, while the person-hours required to produce such a title have probably increased 10x.

Therefore, the only logical explanation for introducing ads into a successful game is the desire to drive a Ferrari. :moo:

That is far from the only logical explanation. In addition to the point above, the additional, on-going income from ads could be used to provide additional content or services after release.

(carnage) #65

with the doom and other ID engines being very mod able i wonder if there would be much protection to stop adds actually being moded out of a game

(ouroboro) #66

Not my fault. Jack up the price, Jack. “If it’s worth it, they will buy.”

…while the person-hours required to produce such a title have probably increased 10x.

The majority of those hours being spent on the addition of bling. If I had my druthers, games would still use the Q1 engine. If half that time was spent developing fresh concepts, gaming would be as exciting as it was a decade ago. Currently, it’s pretty stale, IMO.

…the additional, on-going income from ads could be used to provide additional content or services after release.

I’d rather pay for such content and services the old fashioned way…or not, at my discretion. I shouldn’t have to put up with ads so that a developer can fund a future project that I may or may not want. Make the product first, then I’ll decide if I want it. That’s the gamble one takes in the open market.

Let’s hope not.

Note that some CS players are saying that the ads are actually having a negative impact on gameplay, such as being silhouetted in new places, etc. Unless a developer is willing to spend huge amounts of those precious man-hours carefully playtesting ad placement, they better just put them in from day one, so gameplay can be developed with them in place.

I think (nay, I know in my heart) that many developers are only considering in-game ads because it’s been done by others. “Hey, we should grab a slice of that pie!” Which brings up the old analogy your mother used to make…something about a cliff…

(SCDS_reyalP) #67

Not my fault. Jack up the price, Jack. “If it’s worth it, they will buy.”

…while the person-hours required to produce such a title have probably increased 10x.

The majority of those hours being spent on the addition of bling. If I had my druthers, games would still use the Q1 engine.
[/quote]
There is a significant divergence between how you wish things were, and reality. More wishing is unlikely to have much effect on reality :smiley:

If you want to make a living creating games, reality is a much bigger factor than ouroboro’s fantasy world.

(ouroboro) #68

(Damn this slow forum, forcing me to replace quoted comments I’d already edited.)

Anyway, please spare me the developer’s sob story. Your comment implies that every studio is going to go under unless we accept these life saving ads. How does that explain the glowing success stories which had none? The truth is, everyone is drooling over the in-game advertising model just because it’s being pulled off more and more lately. “Look, they put up with it from that other shitty game, we could probably get away with it, too!”

I’m not sure why you’re so in favor of it. You can’t possibly tell me it enhances a game. I take it you’re a game developer? Got your eyes set on a Ferrari? I heard through the grapevine that you’ve a got a copy of the ET:QW beta. Should I take your stance as a warning that there are ads in the game? The question is rhetorical, what with the NDA and all.

Here’s a question you can answer: do you use an ad-blocker in your browser? I use Firefox with Adblock Plus. I’ll bet a nickel you do, too. I haven’t seen a popup or a banner ad in so long I can’t remember…and it’s been bliss. Let me guess, that’s different somehow, right? Or maybe you’re like my friend, who uses IE with the blocker disabled, because he feels he “owes” website owners for providing him with content. This friend also happens to run several porn sites. Most people hate advertising, unless they make their living from it.

It’s a simple formula: make game, sell game. If people buy it, it was good. If they don’t, try again. There’s no need to muck up my life with more fucking advertisements. I have to look at them 16 hours a day. Unless you’re sleeping, there’s an ad nearby with some smiling twit trying to tell you your life will be better if you’ll just buy Product X. Gaming is an escape from reality; I’d like to keep it that way.

(SCDS_reyalP) #69

No, that’s your creative interpretation. I’m just saying that the business is changing, and going back to the Doom I era where a handful of talented people could make a blockbuster PC game is not realistic. I would dearly love for that to be true (that was my personal dream for a long time, and yes there would be some awesome cars at the end of that dream), but everything I’ve seen indicates that those days are gone for good. Burying your head in the sand isn’t going to change that.

I hate advertising, in almost all it’s forms. I use a popup blocker, but tend not to block banners etc that don’t really get in the way. I avoid TV in general. OTOH, I recognize that advertising makes things possible that would otherwise simply not exist in anything like their current form. Most of television and sports, for example. Most of the stuff we take for granted on the internet too.

Ultimately, if the games with ads don’t offer some value that those without lack, they won’t succeed. Whether that value is more depth, better support, more new content over the lifetime of the game, or lower price is yet to be seen. If the ads are to annoying, people will block them.

If developers try to simply make more money off of it, someone else is going to realize that they can accept a slightly lower margin and offer something with more value instead. The only case where this wouldn’t happen if there was a monopoly or cartel controlling all the games, but fortunately, the games industry isn’t in that situation yet.

(Nail) #70

I don’t agree with the “everyone will do it because they can” concept.
Plus, there’s always a way to block content.

(ouroboro) #71

[quote=“SCDS_reyalP”]

No, that’s your creative interpretation. I’m just saying that the business is changing, and going back to the Doom I era where a handful of talented people could make a blockbuster PC game is not realistic. I would dearly love for that to be true (that was my personal dream for a long time, and yes there would be some awesome cars at the end of that dream), but everything I’ve seen indicates that those days are gone for good. Burying your head in the sand isn’t going to change that.

I hate advertising, in almost all it’s forms. I use a popup blocker, but tend not to block banners etc that don’t really get in the way. I avoid TV in general. OTOH, I recognize that advertising makes things possible that would otherwise simply not exist in anything like their current form. Most of television and sports, for example. Most of the stuff we take for granted on the internet too.

Ultimately, if the games with ads don’t offer some value that those without lack, they won’t succeed. Whether that value is more depth, better support, more new content over the lifetime of the game, or lower price is yet to be seen. If the ads are to annoying, people will block them.

If developers try to simply make more money off of it, someone else is going to realize that they can accept a slightly lower margin and offer something with more value instead. The only case where this wouldn’t happen if there was a monopoly or cartel controlling all the games, but fortunately, the games industry isn’t in that situation yet.[/quote]

I can appreciate this post. You were honest, and didn’t try to belittle me or dismiss my feelings. Thank you.

The way I see it, advertising as an income vehicle should only exist in otherwise free medium. If game developers want to give their games away, and make their money from in-game ads, that’s something for them to consider. I don’t pay for [network] television, so I accept the ads (although I loathe them, and usually mute the TV and noodle on my guitar 'til they’re over). Cable TV is paid for, and therefore doesn’t have traditional advertising (programming ads are different). Similarly, seeing a movie at the theater is a paid event, thus the lack of ads.

Regarding sports, ticket sales are a huge (primary?) moneymaker. Yes they make money from ads, (I try to ignore those damned rotating banners behind the batter’s box), but sports would still exist and thrive on ticket sales alone.

Many websites are merely advertisements themselves; they exist as another vehicle to show your widgets to potential customers. Those sites that actually have valuable content are either paid affairs, or are maintained out of love by individuals. For the latter group, payment usually comes in the form of appreciation and loyalty, and that’s all many of them ask for or expect (and as we all know, these are often the best sites on the internet). And, just as charitable donations outperform taxation as a way to help the needy, a PayPal button on a small independent website is usually better than lacing the site with popups and porn banners.

Advertising is an either-or question, IMO. Free with ads, or paid without. There are examples of products that break this “rule,” such as magazines. But you can always turn the page of a magazine. In this day and age, the internet supersedes magazines anyway, and free independent websites are usually superior. In the case of newspapers, I can understand their advertising, because the newspaper is a dying medium, which I think is sad. That said, I no longer buy the paper, either. The internet is simply better.

Games are paid events. They have my money; I expect ad-free entertainment.

(Nail) #72

but sports would still exist and thrive on ticket sales alone.

sorry, american sports would die without TV, ticket sales couldn’t cover arena maintenence costs let alone player salaries

(ouroboro) #73

You’re implying that players would have to maintain their current salaries, which is ludicrous. They would have to take a pay cut (perish the thought!). Sports existed (and thrived) before TV. In fact, I’d argue that in the case of baseball especially, the years before TV were the golden years. “Exist and thrive” doesn’t have to mean “maintain current levels and continue expanding,” although that seems to be the mindset of pretty much every aspect of American life. People need to slow the fuck down and smell some roses or something, but I digress.

Note that I’m the first one to defend massive player salaries. If a squillion dollars is being generated by a sport, then a huge portion of that is due to the players, who are the sole reason the money is there. That doesn’t mean they’ve earned the amounts they make, it just means they should get first dibs on whatever money there is. If that money were reduced, kids would still grow up dreaming of being the next Babe Ruth, I guarantee it.

(Nail) #74

you said it yourself, the real sports days are over, the TV sports days are here. Face it, in my world nobody who can hit a ball with a stick is worth 100x more than a Pediatric Surgeon, wtf does he contribute to the world. The minimum wage for a MLB player is over $300,000 US, even if he never leaves the bench… when was the last time any of us made that for sitting on our butts.

/rant

(RivrStyx) #75

Cmon Quakewars… i’m stuck in BF hell atm because theres no games out worth a crap. I bought BF2142 to try while waiting for QWs and will not waste money on another subpar game… so there i am in BF hell having EA dictate what i do with my server. I can’t take it much longer waiting for a real game :slight_smile:

BF uses these ads and then still charges for an expansion pack that had very little thought put into it.
Oh an please i don’t ever want to see anything like an ea link again.

(Gringo) #76

Play ET u fool, its a simple solution.

(RivrStyx) #77

Well dope… it may be simple to you but I can’t play the same game forever. I get bored nimrod

(ayatollah) #78

I think what Gringo was eloquently trying to say was, ET is the best game out there at the minute so play that to tide you over until QW. I myself could play ET forever mind, as I don’t have ADD and can play a game for as long as I think it is good, which will probably never wear off ET. I do, however, have OCD which means that I now have to turn my monitor on/off 13 times before I can post again.

In my opinion Gringo was picking up on the fact that you are demanding, like every other “fool”, that QW be released to satisfy your cravings. This is not productive, as has been said many times before, so wait, play ET, play BF, play with yourself. Eventually QW will be released and you will be out of the “BF hell” you describe.

Oh and down with ads in game! Anyone in advertising/marketing should kill themselves…Really kill yourself! :wink:

(Rahabib) #79

I could deal with in game ads as long as it doesnt lag and there is a reduced cost to make up for it. If you charge full price for a game and then put ingame ads, you are a dirty dirty WH***!

(Ifurita) #80

Naturally, you realize that RivrStyx is a former ET player and mapper … right?