BRANDED: In Game Advertising (Part I)

With the advent of Tivo and the death of newspapers, it was only a matter of time before large corporate interests, desperate to grab the elusive 25-49 demographic, turned to in-game advertising. I've heard a range of ideas bandied detailing how to incorporate advertising into games. Everything from placing banners around the edge of the screen, to forcing players to watch advertising before admission into their server to actually having advertisements incorporated into the game media itself.

Of the three, I think the third selection has the potential to be the most intrusive and annoying. The idea of seeing a Tampax sign plastered on the back of a goblin corpse is somewhat disconcerting. Somehow, the escape that games provide might seem somewhat dilluted by a flashing banner on the front of the castle's pub noting that overstock.com is offering 4 for 1 on tube socks. But I don't particularly want to wait around to get into my server. Nor do I want a portion of my screen commandeered by annoying distractions that provide nothing to the game content. So...what to do?

Branding my friends. Branding. More after the jump.


You don't purchase a pair of shoes, you buy Nike's or Reebok's. You don't have a gaming system, you have an Xbox or a Playstation. In today's consumer culture, the brand is synonmous with the product. The brand denotes not only the quality of the product, but also the features and aspects one might expect from it. I propose we carry this mainstay of advertising into the gaming world.

Let's work with an example. In one of my favorite games of all time, Diablo, you could acquire a very strong drop known as the King's Sword of Haste. Invoking the name of this weapon was the same thing as saying: "I posses a can o' whup ass." Now, the name of the weapon, King's Sword of Haste, provided the user with a vague suspicion of what implement was capable of, but it wasn't necessarily clear by virtue of the name itself. The weapon acquired this immediate recognition only after the brand of that sword developed and became the equivalent of its attributes.

What does it all mean Fizzle? It means we can do the same thing with external advertising. We can sell the descriptive terms of high end weapons to corporations. So, instead of a King's Sword of Haste, we'd have a King's Sword of Nike. This is a relatively unobtrusive entrance by the corporate world into our game space, but it still carries the advertising message. Look at this sword, it's amazing, Nike is an excellent brand of sword. Hey, I need a new pair of Nikes (triple clicks sword, taking him to Nike's online store).

Since the descriptive words on many of the in game items were already attributed largely arbitrary definitions, we lose nothing by selling some of these descriptive terms. Advertisers could pay higher dollar for better items, knowing they will be more discussed and more highly reknowned.

Tomorrow I'll talk about some of the ancillary benefits that might be accorded to gamers under such a scheme.

Technorati Tags: MMORPG, Video Game, Online Game, Advertising, Business.

CLICK HERE for the rest!

McDonalds Throws Video Games Under the Bus

Why accept responsibility when you can shove it on someone else?

In a brilliant move sure to inspire the most fervent of hypocrites, the CEO of McDonald's UK has blamed video games for the rampant obesity in today's youth. Now, I may be inclined to agree that prolonged periods of gaming aren't the healthiest pass time, but McDonald's leading the charge? Really? Need a window for your glass house? Because you're tossing a lot of stones. Or 540 calorie Big Macs.

read more digg story

CLICK HERE for the rest!

The Great Consolidation Debate

Introduction
I've been watching recent events in the video game industry with a mix of trepidation and optimism. I'm referring to the wave of mergers and acquisitions that have overtaken the video game industry (not unlike the newspaper and radio industries before it.) Of particular note is the Blizzard/Activision merger and Electronic Art's recent acquisition of Bioware and Pandemic, which represent landmark consolidations in the industry.

Blizzard, the gaming powerhouse behind World of Warcraft, Warcraft, Diablo and Star Craft has joined forces with Activision, the publisher of recent hits such as Call of Duty 4 and Guitar Hero Three. Electronic Arts, which resembles something akin to Goliath in the gaming industry (particularly prior to the mergers), has brought games like the Battlefield 2142 to the public in addition to a wide selection of sports games. Bioware created the instant classics Mass Effect and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic.

Why the Consolidation is Potentially Good
The days of two paddles, a ball, and a dream are behind us. Games today offer massive adventures featuring incredible worlds, all delivered in increasingly impressive graphics. Understandably, developing these games require substantial investments on the part of the company--and significant risk. For smaller companies, producing a game with the quality such as Bioshock or Mass Effect represents a tremendous risk to the company. If the game tanks, the failure will drag the company down with it, even if the company has enjoyed numerous successes. All of the time and expense spent developing an excellent team of programmers will be lost as the company crumbles--a terrific waste of resources.

A larger company diversifies this risk by producing numerous games simultaneously, and the profits and successes of one game will cover for the failures of another (similar to movie studios). Thus, in a larger company, an excellent development team can suffer an off game without facing imminent doom and destruction. Imagine the unthinkable: Warcraft was excellent, but Diablo was a complete dud...would we have ever seen World of Warcraft? In a corporate behemoth this debate need not occur.


Why the Consolidation Potentially Disastrous
A common argument is that a heavily consolidated industry will suffer from a lack of diversity and innovation. Larger corporations are generally beholden to their shareholders and maximizing profit, which at times creates significant risk aversion in the boardrooms. The refusal to take chances on new and untested ideas could very well result in missed opportunities for the industries and the gamers who rely on it. Also, larger corporations often operate under explicit corporate policies that encourage compliance, which may further hamper diversity in thought.

Thus, when a smaller operation is purchased and incorporated into the mother corporation, many of the attributes that granted the smaller operation flexibility and maneuverability may dissipate. When the employees and managers are responsible only to themselves they may be much more willing to gamble with their fortunes since they are masters of their own fate and will directly reap the benefits of their efforts.

Conclusion
I'm really unsure at this point. I'd have to see what games Bioware and Blizzard churn out in their new homes. Activision has historically been incredible at publishing excellent games while leaving the creative direction in the hands of the game studios they own (so I expect great things from this merger.) I am hopeful for EA, but I know significantly less about their internal management policies. If EA simply provides Bioware with enough funds to take their work to the next level I expect great things; if they attempt to substitute their own corporate vision for Bioware's I'm more skeptical.

Either way, I think we're in store for some real interesting developments. Game on.

CLICK HERE for the rest!