18/12: Electronic Ads... uhm, Arts!
Electronic Arts, a leading publisher of games that we sometimes love and sometimes hate, is spicing "Need for Speed Carbon" and "Battlefield 2142" with dynamic ads.
Since the announcement, there’ve been some properly heated discussions on the Internet: many gamers feel resentment because of the approach taken by the giant publisher. “They feed us with ad-infested games and don’t even decrease the price tags? EA won’t see my cash again.” Some of the gamers vowed to vote with their wallets and never buy games from EA.
There are voices that reasonably underscore the importance of funding that the developers get in exchange for bringing promotions into games. We’ve been hearing these voices for about ten years now, and it seems to make sense. In practice, you still pay $40 for “NFS Carbon” to play it on older platforms (PC, PSP, PS2), and you pay $50 to $60 to play it on PS3, Wii, or XBox.
Can this be justified by the development costs alone when EA will be earning additional millions for constantly streaming ads into games? The answer is, today, EA doesn’t care what you think. Dynamic billboards are just there.
Our gallery has some shots of ads in “Need for Speed Carbon”, and these give a lot to think about. For instance, how efficient is a billboard you consistently speed by at 200 miles per hour?
When you pitch Castrol SYNTEC in a game for people who don’t own sport cars just yet, is that because you failed to assess the audience properly or because you strongly believe in longevity of the oil lineup? See, if they had sport cars, they wouldn’t be playing NFS. They’d be off driving on real roads instead.
You can read the rest of the article at V-Lodge. Click.
buy cheap softwarecheap softwareoem softwarecheap adobe acrobat
Since the announcement, there’ve been some properly heated discussions on the Internet: many gamers feel resentment because of the approach taken by the giant publisher. “They feed us with ad-infested games and don’t even decrease the price tags? EA won’t see my cash again.” Some of the gamers vowed to vote with their wallets and never buy games from EA.
There are voices that reasonably underscore the importance of funding that the developers get in exchange for bringing promotions into games. We’ve been hearing these voices for about ten years now, and it seems to make sense. In practice, you still pay $40 for “NFS Carbon” to play it on older platforms (PC, PSP, PS2), and you pay $50 to $60 to play it on PS3, Wii, or XBox.
Can this be justified by the development costs alone when EA will be earning additional millions for constantly streaming ads into games? The answer is, today, EA doesn’t care what you think. Dynamic billboards are just there.
Our gallery has some shots of ads in “Need for Speed Carbon”, and these give a lot to think about. For instance, how efficient is a billboard you consistently speed by at 200 miles per hour?
When you pitch Castrol SYNTEC in a game for people who don’t own sport cars just yet, is that because you failed to assess the audience properly or because you strongly believe in longevity of the oil lineup? See, if they had sport cars, they wouldn’t be playing NFS. They’d be off driving on real roads instead.
You can read the rest of the article at V-Lodge. Click.
