chronovore | on in-game advertising (Reply)

FileBlog: In-Game Ads: An Alternate View:

So Why Should You Care About These Guys Making Money?
Good question. Cohen suggests that in the long run this extra revenue can help the industry. Here's his reasoning: games are expensive to make, and with each generation the problem gets worse. That stifles creativity, because when games are so expensive, publishers like him don't want to take risks on unproven stuff. The result is store shelves full of sequels and gameplay re-hashes. But, the extra juice games can get from advertising will mitigate the costs. And assuming publishers channel that extra revenue into riskier titles or better game development (and don't just bonus it out to their executives), that means better games -- and more of a variety of games -- for everyone.

The response I hear from most gamers to whether or not they'll accept in-game advertising is "Yeah, if it will make the games cheaper." But while games have increasingly cost more to create, let alone promote and market, the retail price of games has not significantly risen in accordance with inflation. Adding advertising in games is a way to ameliorate the development costs in a game.

Anyway, I'd prefer to have no advertising in games, but I don't mind product placement if it's handled well. Casino Royale, the movie, brought in US$70,000,000 for in-movie advertising -- before the movie ever opened. Only a couple of instances there were jarring, broke immersion. The rest fit into the world that was presented. If we can manage that in games, I think we'd be looking at a similar acceptance by players.