Activision-Blizzard Executive Against In-Game Advertising
by Wade Larson on February 4, 2008
For those gamers who view in-game advertising as a pox upon their favorite hobby, you now have friends in high places.
In a recent article in the Financial Times, the chief executive of Activision Blizzard Bobby Kotick, commented on the future of advertising on cell phones, social networking sites, and video games.
In a nutshell, he’s against it.
The Financial Times quoted Kotick as saying of in-game advertising: “It’s early days. I wouldn’t go in that direction myself.”
The article goes on to say what most gamers could probably tell you: They don’t like ads in their games. But they do like free stuff.
Advertisers cited research showing that consumers found mobile, video game and social network advertising intrusive, but many were willing to put up with it in exchange for free content.
As technology continues to make it easier to avoid advertising, companies are looking for new ways to get their message across to consumers. Part of the process is finding new places to advertise, especially to the coveted 18-30 year old market. This is where sites like Facebook and Myspace come in, as well as video games.
And while seeing a Coca-Cola billboard in Grand Theft Auto IV, or an Adidas sign in the latest FIFA, doesn’t exactly break the spirit of the game, seeing Sonic sporting a pair of Nikes or catching Master Chief slurping down a can of Game Fuel during a cutscene can make a game feel like a sellout.
However, on the flip side, advertisers’ financial support could potentially reduce the inexorable climb of game prices. So perhaps a fragile truce can be struck to ensure that advertisements don’t find their way into inappropriate places.
And as long as people like Kotick are sticking up for keeping games great, we’ll get by just fine.
Thanks to TeamXbox for the image.
- Activision Blizzard Opts Out of ESA, E3
- Unexpected Alliance: Activision and Vivendi Merge in $18 Billion Deal
- Annual Activision: Skateboarding Commando Rock Stars Get All The Chicks
- Starcraft 2 on PS3? Dream on!
- Watch Your Back EA, Activision Blizzard is Coming For You…
- Blizzard Announces New World of Warcraft Hero Class: The Bard
- My God, It’s Full Of Starcraft: Blizzard Store Offers Digital Downloads
- Activision File Patent for a DJ Hero Video Game
on February 5, 2008 12:28 am
I don’t mind the advertisements but I think the price of the game should go down. These companies have to be paying a pretty penny to get their name in the games so why am I still paying 60 bucks for the games?
on February 5, 2008 5:22 am
I buy games with in-game advertising USED, as should everyone. Either charge me, or advertise to me. You don’t get to do both.
And for all the “OMG IT FITS WITH THE THEME OF THE GAME!!111!” people, and there will be those people, it doesn’t fucking matter. NO, it doesn’t matter if it “fits with the theme” of the game. We’re being ADVERTISED TO in our games, the games that we payed full price for. If the ads themselves don’t piss you off then just the principle of the thing is enough for me.
Seeing ads for ford vehicles in Crackdown was a huge letdown. I bought rainbow 6 vegas used for this very reason. I hated doing it, the game would be WELL worth the $60 price if not for the body spray ads and verizon internet ads in the multiplayer. Complete and utter bullshit. I play games to ESCAPE reality, it doesn’t matter if the game is realistic or not ads DO NOT BELONG IN GAMES!
on February 5, 2008 8:17 am
“And while seeing a Coca-Cola billboard in Grand Theft Auto IV, or an Adidas sign in the latest FIFA, doesn’t exactly break the spirit of the game”
No no no, I’ve seen this line before. In FIFA I see your point, that’s obvious, but GTA? “Adverts” in GTA have always been a large satirical element of the game, especially the radio ads, billboards and shop names. I for one believe that Rockstar would never have to stoop so low as to start having in-game adverts, apart from of course, the songs on the radio, in themselves an advertisement for the band.
As for general in-game ads, that’ll be left for the drones at EA I’m sure. They already have ads all over the place. then there’s the ulimate advert diguised as a racing game, Gran Turismo :o)
on February 5, 2008 8:31 am
Sometimes you need adverts to recreate the feel/spirit/location of a game. Eg. A city needs ads. Why not have real ones instead of fake ones.
Plus, London in GT5 Prologue has the ads that are relevant to the area, perfectly recreating what you’d see when you are there.
on February 5, 2008 10:19 am
Arrgh, no avatar. Advertising is perfectly legitimate when used to further immurse a player in to a world. I don’t get what the big protest is about, unless you are a highly suggestible person who has to purchase everything advertised, in which case you shouldn’t be using the net or playing a video game.
on February 5, 2008 4:23 pm
“I don’t get what the big protest is about,”
Because they’re putting COMMERCIALS IN YOUR GAMES. That’s total bullshit. And has it been confirmed that GTA4 is going to have real ads in it? I’d hate to buy that game used because I know it’s going to be awesome.
on February 5, 2008 4:27 pm
I think David’s saying it would be like having adverts on BBC channels even though you pay for a license. You pay for the game, so why should you have ads.
However, what if it takes the heat off developers and makes sure they make a profit, so that they can put more money into development, take more risks and produce better games? Would that justify ingame ads where they have a place to exist in the game world? Ie. In places where we would have ads in the real world.
on February 5, 2008 4:40 pm
The problem with that is, they’ve ALREADY said “well, we need more money for this gen, pony up assholes!” and we did. We’re paying the extra $10 they so desperately needed. PC games have been “HD” for years and $50 is enough for those games, we’re paying $60 now.
I play games to ESCAPE reality, even in a realistic game. If I wanted the real world with real world ads I’d go outside. I’d much rather the game use fake ads, or just none. My immersion is not going to be ruined with them.
“WTF, there’s no coke ads or ford trucks? WHAT KIND OF CRAZY WORLD IS THIS?”
*throws game out the window*
Here’s an idea. You want ads included with the game? Fine. Paper inserts, put them in the game case. Even If throw them out I at least have to SEE them to do it. Pack that bastard full of them until the case doesn’t even shut properly. I don’t think it’s too much to ask that they keep them out of the ACTUAL GAME.
on February 6, 2008 8:18 am
I wouldn’t be up for a commercial video popping up for 30 secs while i’m playing, but if a billboard in a sandbox game advertises a real product or a fake one, does it matter? I’m sure i have heard of or seen ads for other game franchises within other games, and there was no uproar then. Perhaps its not the ads themselves but the product they are advertising that matters. Perhaps developers are heading down this route because of the ‘used’ game market as it cannabilise’s sales. More cash to spend on development could improve the game playing experience as a whole.
on February 6, 2008 5:37 pm
“but if a billboard in a sandbox game advertises a real product or a fake one, does it matter?”
Yes, it does. I’m being ADVERTISED to in my $60 game. That’s total bullshit. We’ve already heard the “we need more money for game development!” story, that was the $10 increase in game prices. We’re paying that. There’s no excuse for in-game ads.
on February 7, 2008 9:16 am
“We’ve already heard the “we need more money for game development!” story, that was the $10 increase in game prices. We’re paying that. There’s no excuse for in-game ads”
As of the time of writing, current exchange rates (Bloomburg) mean that here in the UK, i am paying roughly $77 per game, and thats if i shop around. So i can’t share the same point of view. If in game ads drove the cost down for me and other UK gamers, then we have to be all for it. Europe already gets the shaft every which way in this industry and we continue to support it. Sixty bucks for a game is a fair deal from my side of the pond, and thats with a ten dollar increase applied? Maybe you don’t know how good the US and Japan have got it my friend.
on February 7, 2008 4:02 pm
the exchange rate argument is idiotic. come here and work for $8 an hour and tell me how lucky we got it then.
on February 7, 2008 5:24 pm
I think advertising has its place. What would sports games be like if they didn’t have the actual teams and logos? What would NASCAR be like if the Tide car didn’t have Tide on it, or if they didn’t have GoodYear tires? And what about Rock Band with its authentic instruments?
The thing I find funny is that devs used to pay (and some still do) to get real-world products in their games, to make the game seem more like real life.
I can understand and accept AXE bodyspray posters in Rainbow Six Vegas, but I can’t accept that every single car in Vegas is a Dodge.
Would DOA Xtreme Beach Volleyball be any different if the swimsuits were from real fashion brands, or if the volleyball had a Wilson logo on it? I don’t think it would.
I think, if the game companies are smart, they can insert ads where they make sense and not affect the game. The minute Samus’s suit is powered by IBM or the Agents in Crackdown start wearing Under Armor to keep cool, that’s when I’ll start throwing elbows.
on February 7, 2008 6:20 pm
Honestly? I don’t give a f*** about exchange rates or what games cost in another country. I don’t pay other country prices, I pay US prices and those have risen because the developers whined about the increased cost of development. They got what they wanted and still try and excuse ads in games.
I WILL NOT buy games (new, anyway) that contain in-game ads. Inexcusable.