Sony, Activision CEOs skeptical of in-game advertising
At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick and Sony Group CEO Howard Stringer have expressed doubts over the marketable future of in-game advertising, arguing against the assumption that this new form of advertising is the solution to the industry's monetary needs.
Stringer reasons that advertisers' pockets are not as deep as everyone hopes, adding to this the fact that "young people don't like advertising very much." A bold statement, to be sure. For his part, Kotick states "I wouldn't go in that direction myself," causing us to look back at the heavy product placement in the Activision-published Guitar Hero III and Tony Hawk's Proving Ground.
These comments come in direct opposition to companies like IGA, who quite recently boasted about their upcoming integration of ads into the EA-published Burnout Paradise. We'll have to side with Stringer and Kotick on this one; we young people don't like advertising very much.
[Via PS3 Fanboy]
Stringer reasons that advertisers' pockets are not as deep as everyone hopes, adding to this the fact that "young people don't like advertising very much." A bold statement, to be sure. For his part, Kotick states "I wouldn't go in that direction myself," causing us to look back at the heavy product placement in the Activision-published Guitar Hero III and Tony Hawk's Proving Ground.
These comments come in direct opposition to companies like IGA, who quite recently boasted about their upcoming integration of ads into the EA-published Burnout Paradise. We'll have to side with Stringer and Kotick on this one; we young people don't like advertising very much.
[Via PS3 Fanboy]





















(Page 1) Reader Comments
I agree!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
That said, for some reason I feel the desire to buy some lightspeed briefs...
Reply
All advertising pisses me off. I don't consider it like breathing because, unlike breathing, advertising is not necessary to life. Many thing are made more expensive because of advertising. The money advertisers throw around didn't pop out someone's a$$ at no cost. It came out of people that are poor and not wealthy. I don't buy, steal, or play games with advertising in them. Not a single billboard worth.
Poor people pay for advertising? What? The cost of advertisement is built into the price of a product. Even then, it's not necessarily bad, because there is a tension between the cost of advertising and how much revenue that advertising generates through sales, and there is a relationship between volume of sales and cost of the product.
Reply
If developers can't think of clever ads to put in their games, like Triple Play Baseball and You Don't Know Jack used to do, then real world ads are better than poorly made up ads.
Reply
Now, compare this to Rock Band were the advertising is handled by... people who make musical instruments?!? The fuck?!? You mean suddenly seeing logos for guitar string makers or actual effects pedals is a good thing? Yeah, actually. Because it never felt invasive.
Music artists do not see a lot of money from CD sales... in fact, they see very little. Record companies are the ones that make money there. Bands make their money from touring, but their parent company will not pay for the concerts or expenses that come with. They'll take their cut, naturally, but they don't fron the cash for concerts. So if a group of bands want to tour together but the consequence of that is a Sony booth or Monster ads all over the buses and entrances, oh well.
I have a hard time calling it selling out when bands seek financing in areas where the record companies should be doing their job.
Blegh.
Reply
Reply
But that's only if it's not glaring or if it's generic.
If it's for something as generic as a timeless brand, like Ford or Apple or something and it doesn't look completely out of place, I don't really mind it, I suppose.
But if it's tries to hit me over the head with something stupid, like the new Chevey Cobalt or something then it's gonna piss me off something fierce.
Reply
Reply
When it's just tossed in there for no apparent reason (like Guitar Hero 3) then it becomes a problem. People will say GH3 is borderline because rock tours are sponsored, but the placements are much too blatant.
I think if developers and advertisers focus on where advertising can enhance the game AND make money this can be a big win.
Reply
Again, you'd reduce the outrage from gamers by, I predict, as much as 90% if they would just pass the savings on to us. Advertisements are supposed to be there as us paying for something. Ads on TV and radio? so we don't have to pay the stations ourselves to watch it. What do we get for being subjected to ads in games?
Whatever happened to advertising as a way to get your product out there? It used to be just so people would think "Oh, there IS a cream for this embarrasing rash". Instead, we are bombarded with ads with the intent of "Buy, this. you didn't know you wanted it, but you do. get it now". it's more subliminal, and that disturbs me.
For instance, Halo3. Was there really anyone in the world that DIDN'T know about it? Then why bother spending millions of dollars to keep advertising it?
Reply
It's made doubly-annoying if the perceived corporate placement doesn't affect the length of the game or it's cost. TV is acceptable with commercials WHEN IT'S FREE. If I pay $60 for a game, I expect it to either be commercial free OR to show me a tangible benefit to put up with those placements.
Reply
Reply
Reply
especially because we all know what kind of crap it implies...
Reply
GOOD! Older people don't like it very much either. I'll be turning 36 in about half a month and I absolutely detest it. If you make a good game, money will come to you anyway without having to sell out your product and your soul to scummy advertisers.
Product placements however is a slightly different story. In a driving game for example you probably want to be able to drive, say, a Ferrari for example.
In a skateboarding game you probably want to be able to skate on a board made by...well, whatever company's considered hot and hip in that subculture.
I don't give half a s### sideways about billboards and such junk though, that's just visual noise that consumes memory space that could have been spent better on higher-res textures and more detailed worlds and so on.
Reply
>
So to make things more "true to life", movie makers decided to start using brand placement in the movies.
>
Now, oddly enough, every character in movies owns a Mac (despite my being in government service for almost a decade and never having seen other than a dell or HP computer, appearently in movieland, all militaries and gov't agencies are apple fans) According to Tom Clancy, everyone in Las Vegas Drives a Dodge, and I have notised that Any time a character does anything on the Big Screen, The camera is certain to e at teh proper angle to catch the brand of DVD player, Memory card, or Coffee they use.
>
It is getting to the point where I am now noticing the placement of product and brands and actually miss what's going on, because I see the obligatory camera pan of the prduct label, and in my irritation, miss something being said.
>
PRetty soon it will be like going to the mivies where in addition to product placement, every time you start your game, you have to sit through 5 commercials before the "press start to play" screen.
This post brought to you by S-Mart. Shop Smart, Shop S-Mart.
Reply
Reply