Activision Declines Use of In-Game Ads Out of "Respect"

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Initial Response: WHERE IS THE REAL BOBBY KOTICK & WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH HIM? (not that I really care).

On further thought ... wait so he wants to keep charging the consumer extra instead of making money through ads and bringing the game's price down. BRAVO SIR! Thats more like the Bobby we all know and Hate!

He said this because he does not want other people to make money off of the ad's in game even if it means that they will make less money. It is still an evil plot.

Tom Goldman:

it really can be strange when you're questing through a game like Diablo IIIand you see a Pepsi can monster that shakes himself up and fizzes on you as an attack. Thankfully, Activison has no plans to implement such a thing.

...that would actually be a fairly hysterical monster to encounter and I think the only way it could be acceptable is if it dropped an item called [Can Koozie of the Gods]

Sougo:
Initial Response: WHERE IS THE REAL BOBBY KOTICK & WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH HIM? (not that I really care).

On further thought ... wait so he wants to keep charging the consumer extra instead of making money through ads and bringing the game's price down. BRAVO SIR! Thats more like the Bobby we all know and Hate!

My thoughts exactly. He doesn't want the money from ads. Not when YOUR money has been doing so well for him.

Also: Out of respect? You're joking, right? All the shit you pull, and NOW you decide you repect the gamers? BULLSHIT! This is an evil plan, I just know it!

I honestly can't say I'm at all impressed by Kotick's "respect" given that google search suggestions still add "is the devil" after his name as the third option down. It's hard to imagine such a guy "respecting" rather than "trying to please gamers enough so that he doesn't completely alienate them to the point they stop buying his product."

Apparently the Invasion of the Body-Snatchers has begun. Wonder when they got Kotick...

On that note, though, if it is appropriate, I have no problem with a "real" ad vs. a "fake" ad. What's "appropriate"? Billboards in cities, sideline or rink-boards in sports games, racing games. Basically any "real-world" setting where (shock of shocks) we see ads regularly. Why not have a Nike of Addidas ad on the sidelines in FIFA '10? We see them when we watch the game.

Additionally, if it helps keep a developer afloat, even better. Maybe it will mean a bit more time polishing games that need it, rather than an early, flawed release.

Would someone please post the picture of the Admiral Ackbar meme?

K, thanks.

I don't even care about them, whats the difference if its a Pepsi Machine or a fake drink machine in a game.

I haven't played that many games that even have in-game ads, so this doesn't really matter that much to me.

I think the last one I noticed was Saints Row 2...I would always line my character up in front of the billboards and take a picture with my cameraphone, because I thought it was actually kinda neat.

SimuLord:
Nice to see that the last, best hope of humanity's increasing his Karma level.

Bobby is only level 20? I thought he would have at least been the Symbol of Order by now, if not the Messiah.

On topic: Ah, Kotick. Your ability to draw ineffectual nerd rage over the internet, even when saying something that benefits gamers, warms my cold, black heart. Godspeed you champion of bringing me my daily dose of comedy, and may you never lose your touch.

SimuLord:
My case for Bobby Kotick. I had a little fun with the concept after the Extra Credits "Free Speech" episode aired.

Holy crap, that actually makes a lot of sense and I can't believe I never even considered that before.

Also I'm a bit frightened, but I don't want to detract to far in this thread.

Knight Templar:
That or he just passed a speech check.

Rats, your Fallout 3 styled reply was better than mine.

Run through the translator this means "The dev teams refused to put in game ads in games where it doesn't make sense and my PR department tells me we can't have another IW incident or you guys will riot so they had me say this instead."

Or something to that effect my translator program could just be paraphrasing.

Take note: the map pack for Call of Duty 4 was sponsored by Nvidia (for the PC), whereas the Stimulus and Resurgence map pack cost $15 apiece through Steam.

By the looks of things, someone at Activision saw that sponsorships rake in far less profits than selling the extra content directly.

respect do they even know the meaning of the word

Activision and respect for the customer?

I would honestly prefer him getting his stupidly large amounts of extra money through advertisement than fucking with developer's design to make it more like Call of Duty.

So taking more money from players is ok, but in-game ads that could actually increase immersion like those on prototype are not? ok.

DamienHell:
Kotick just earned some points, now how is he going to flush them down the toilet?

He said it would be ok to take cinematics from, say, Starcraft 2 and sell them as stand alone movie. I think thats 100 times more negative points than this ?

1 step forward, hit by a truck and gets thrown 3 miles back.

http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/112/1120940p1.html

Lightslei:
I wouldn't mind in-game ads as long as they meet 2 conditions:
1) Do not look "forced"

This is how I am. If you were to recreate, say, Time Square, I wouldn't mind the ads, because that's what Time Square is; one giant ad. But when you have a wall dedicated to a Pepsi ad in a game like Halo, or CoD, that's when I start to get a bit upset.

Maybe this guy isn't so bad after all. ...I said "maybe".

So one time a new radio station started up and it had no ads and it was amazing just non-stop music. Then they got greedy and ... well ... ads are a necessary evil in most cases ... a very evil evil but necessary.

This could backfire, but I like respect ... if it's not a load of horsepucky.

Snotnarok:
You find it disrespectful to the customer? How about charging 15 dollars for a map pack you assholes, one of them having 2 maps from and old game.

Well, no. Because you don't have to buy it if you don't want to. In-Game ads are something you don't get a choice on. I'm totally with Kotick on this one...product placement is one of the most disgustingly forced things in television right now and none of the revenue from it is going into helping the consumers or reducing ad time.

Gonna have to do more than that to make me believe he's in it for the audience.

I'm so glad to see my fellow Escapists are completely unbiased.

ArmorArmadillo:

Snotnarok:
You find it disrespectful to the customer? How about charging 15 dollars for a map pack you assholes, one of them having 2 maps from and old game.

Well, no. Because you don't have to buy it if you don't want to. In-Game ads are something you don't get a choice on. I'm totally with Kotick on this one...product placement is one of the most disgustingly forced things in television right now and none of the revenue from it is going into helping the consumers or reducing ad time.

I'd rather see dumb ads in a game instead of being charged stupid amounts for games or updates.

Honestly in game adds or say a soda machine don't bother me. Nice little bit of familiar feeling of the world around me.

What I do mind is a Burger King Billboard on EVER billboard for 500 miles nonstop.

A Coke machine, cool...but i don't need to see piles of coke cans from a broken one like they just magicly only stocked the machine with one flavor/brand.

Oh and anytime someone talks "Here I got you a Bushmaster 5.56." cool but if I see "I got you a bushmaster 5.56 (tm) with fine corinthian leather butt stock, and the upgrade optional for a low price sony (tm) laser pointer..."

You just turned it into a infomercial or a joke scene from Wanyes World.

Moderation is the key, but advertisers never think that they want saturation.

Because honestly I don't mind a Burger King in a GTA game, but realism would say a McDonalds is around it within about 600 yards.

At least they did something smart, for once.
But yeah I could handle a AD or two if they aren't pushed in to your face, (Indestructible Pepsi machines anyone?) And if they game cost would be under 20-25 euros purchase.

and i thought common sense was inexistent in the little world of gaming developing...

Dexter111:

Tom Goldman:
Just when evidence had come out indicating that in-game advertisements have a positive effect on consumer spending, Activision CEO Bobby Kotick has indicated a reluctance to use them at all. In comments made at a media conference today, Kotick stated that in-game ads are disrespectful to his customers.

Despite a perception by some that Kotick is all about profit, he alleges that Activision is not focused on making that profit through in-game ads. "There was a time where we thought advertising and sponsorship was a big opportunity, but what we realized is our customers are paying $60 for a game or paying a monthly subscription fee and they don't really want to be barraged with sponsorship or advertising," Kotick said. "So being very respectful of our audiences, unless it's something that's really authentic and will enhance the game experience, we're generally not going to include something in the game."

"There may be future opportunities where you might offer a consumer an advertiser-supported experience so they wouldn't have to pay for it," he continued. "But as long as our audience is paying $60 for a game or a subscription fee I think we're going to limit the amount of advertising or sponsorship incorporated into a game."

This could go a long way for Kotick's image in the eyes of gamers. In-game advertising makes sense in certain titles, like Tony Hawk or Guitar Hero that use real-world products. On the other hand, it really can be strange when you're questing through a game like Diablo III and you see a Pepsi can monster that shakes himself up and fizzes on you as an attack. Thankfully, Activison has no plans to implement such a thing.

Source: IGN

Permalink

I see a Reading Comprehension 101 Error...

sure, for you

I have no problem with ingame advertising as long as it fits with the world its in. The best 2 examples I can think of is Alan Wake and Prototype. In Alan Wake, the Verizon ads were a bit too obtrusive (though I didnt know they are a real company) but the idea of getting a battery maker to sponser really helped with the immersion. In Prototype, you're running around New York which has a boat load of adverts in real life so making them real instead of made up is fine with me.

Meh, he can say this because he is sitting on that money making pile that is CoD. Most game developers don't have that kind of money and maybe need ingame adds to bump up their cash. He's still speaking out of his arse.

Kotick wins no respect from me, especially given I just read that he is going to charge for cutscenes. I've actually enjoyed some in-game advertising, I've never seen an intrusive form that has ruined my life.

It's not so much out of respect as it is out of the knowledge that doing it would cause significant negative PR for the company and do more damage to their profits than it'd help. Kotick's an exec of a publicly-traded company; there is no way in hell he's doing this for moral reasons.

Not that I'd expect him to, obviously.

Here's an idea for advertising...

Pepsi could pay huge to have Coke ads in games like Kane & Lynch 2.

The only reason Kotick/Acti-Blizz would ever say "we're not going to use advertising" is because if in-game advertising is on the table, then people might consider asking why games companies don't reduce the retail price when a soda company or something are ponying up.

Enigmers:
Since when does Bobby Kotick care about what gamers thought of his products? I thought his usual stance was "I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of how much money I have."

I reckon Activision hasn't been offered as much money as they thought they would, so they've sacked off the idea. Anyway, it's a good thing!!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here