Study: 82 percent of gamers don't mind in-game ads

I agree with bit-tech on this one. In game ads that are parodies of real advertising make a better game. I think it also indicates creative freedom. If a publisher hasn't made a developer use advertising space to make money, it's unlikely random cool ideas have been subdued by them either.

i liked the ads from Duke Nukem. the posters for sister act III and attack of the bleached blonde biker bimbos or soemthing like that. they wuz goood

heh, i was reading an article about this yesterday with the same figures, and thought then they must have made them up.
I could understand ppl not really being phased by them, but i really cant imagine who would think they enhance the game in any way. I think most people have developed the ability to blank out adverts - its practically a survival trait these days.
I guess it was an inevitable step that adverts would invade games eventually, and made more so by the rise of captive audience console gamers who have to look at what you show them, as proven by the xbox360.
As long as the adverts are properly blended into the game and dont interfere i can grit my teeth and bear it - something like a "pepsi" blimp flying about gta or the background billboards would be acceptable, but i'd start getting pissed if they start splashing adds on loading screens and the like (which i can see being one of the early uses, as its much like tv ads in that ppl are sat waiting and will watch pretty much anything).

im not too fussed solong as they conform to the confirm to the genre of the game

i.e. if you where walking through a derelict city you would expect to see a mcDonalds sign broken in half or half torn posters on the wall yet you would not expect to see a fully glowing mcdonalds sign or really bright posters like in the screen grab above on every street

Although I would hate to have a real ad in GTA replace the parody ads, I don't mind ads in other games so long as they fit, although it does make me snigger sometimes, like the red bull cans on one of the stages on GH3 and the "Bow Chicka Wah Wah" girls.

As long as the ads follow the following conditions they are fine:
1: They keep the cost of the games down or reduce the cost of the games to below what they are now without game quality suffering.

2: They are restricted to billboards, signs, blimps, vehicles (like trucks, taxis, pizza delivery cars, courier cars/vans etc), shop fronts/names, on TV's seen in shop fronts or in houses, on radio stations like in GTA 3, or background conversations of people talking about things.

3: MOST IMPORTANTLY they DO NOT have splash screens, pop-ups, loading screens or anything that is 'in your face' or intrusive or in any way detracts from the game being enjoyable.

4: They do not collect information on the player.

If they do not follow those 4 points then I am against them completely!

They could add a function where, for example, when you are looking at a billboard (or a TV) directly in front of you (not off in the distance) you can press a button to get more information about the product or service and allow you to select to enter an e-mail address to have information sent to if you choose (with the ability to opt-out when you want if you change your mind later) then this gives you the option of getting more information from the ad if it appeals to you but if it doesn't appeal to you it is not being intrusive.
IIRC in GTA 3 the posters for the marathon race allowed you to press the A button to get details of when and where the race was but if you didn't press the A button no further info was shown.

If they go against this then I am all for people releasing patches for games to remove advertising completely no matter what the games developers and producers think or want, even if a patch to remove advertising was to be labelled illegal (legal disclaimer: Bit-Tech are not responsible for that statement).

Game developers and producers need to show us the game players (who are their customers and the ones who effectively pay they wages/salaries) respect or we won't buy their games, then where will they get their money from?

Originally Posted by Smegwarrior
As long as the ads follow the following conditions they are fine:
1: They keep the cost of the games down or reduce the cost of the games to below what they are now without game quality suffering.

hah! wouldnt that be lovely if the money generated went into making the games (especially for consoles) less of a ripoff. Chances of that happening are slimmer than Calista Flockheart though - its profit profit profit.

I'm going to agree with smeg.

Of course, I think anybody from generation X and beyond is basically immune to ads. (at least the people who have graduated High School, and know how to properly research products before buying them)

As long as they're not totally in your face, I'm fine with them.

If they're done tastefully.

And make sense. Like Vegas 2 having movie posters in the convention center (The only one I specifically remember adverts) for I Am Legend. That was okay - If they were all like that then sure, go for it.

I have an issue with ingame ads when they start trying to drag ads from your browsing history. Partly because I don't like the system, and partly because when I'm gaming I don't want to see ads for boobs. It'd be distracting.

I HATE real ads in games, however parody ads are fun to see, however limited to 1 or 2.
If I was a reviewer, on a mark on 10 it would get -3 if only 1 real ad show up.
I purchased a game, not a freaking shopping channel. I already have 3 of them on my TV, I don't need one more.

And I wonder who they survey? 'cause they sure missed a big spot.

Originally Posted by Smegwarrior
*snip*

completely agree.

i also like to add that when a add campaign starts to get in my face, the company immediately goes to my embargo list.

i remember one from an anonymous company in youtube, each time i searched for something a flash animation would appear on the right and blert out loud and stupid music and a animation of orange blob moving.... i said to my self: "i think it is optimus, if it is them i will never buy something from them and i will send them an email saying their add campaign has has failed miserably and has made me swear to never buy any of their crap", it was optimus, i still have to send the email to them....

OPhhTMmI9W0

the first part of the song with the strings and some drums on this video:

c4I7hLd24O0

but very very very loud and without warning and no button to mute it or disable its sound.....

Originally Posted by Smegwarrior
As long as the ads follow the following conditions they are fine:
1: They keep the cost of the games down or reduce the cost of the games to below what they are now without game quality suffering.

2: They are restricted to billboards, signs, blimps, vehicles (like trucks, taxis, pizza delivery cars, courier cars/vans etc), shop fronts/names, on TV's seen in shop fronts or in houses, on radio stations like in GTA 3, or background conversations of people talking about things.

3: MOST IMPORTANTLY they DO NOT have splash screens, pop-ups, loading screens or anything that is 'in your face' or intrusive or in any way detracts from the game being enjoyable.

4: They do not collect information on the player.

5: The context of the ad doesn't interrupt the game. As usual, I'll come back to SC:CT for this. They weren't insanely obtrusive, but looked out of place enough to lose the moment.

If done properly ads can actually make the game better. It is all about placement. BF2142 is a great example of ads done wrong. However sports games make perfect sense. What would an arena be without ads? It would look strange.

But they should bring the game cost down if using in game ads. I sure as hell do not want to play $60 for a game and have ads in it. that is just plain ridicules.

Adds usually have an upside for the player, eg. cheaper cost or somthing.
So im all for them.

okay so where was I when they do these "studies"? I for one dont like the ads that are in game but dont mind so much when they are in like the config screens and what not.

Originally Posted by freedom810
Adds usually have an upside for the player, eg. cheaper cost or somthing.
So im all for them.

I'm sorry, where was the cheaper cost in Spider-Man? Or in BF2142? Or any of the other games that have had advertising thrown into them? Even being ad-supported, those games are still as expensive as their rivals on the store shelf.

Games are not cheaper with ad support. BF2142 sure the heck wasnt (and had a nice little easter egg INSIDE the package). The ingame adverts are just a way for the company to make a few more bucks off of you. After all, even bit-tech here has ads that are paid to them for every click. And you can bet its the same thing with these adverts in game. If a game was truly cheaper, maybe. But thats pushing it. To me it takes away the games depth. And I surely think that there 'data' is skewed, propaganda indeed.

In movie ads really burn me... Anyone remember the scene in Fantastic 4? A friggen walmart sign, amongst others? Movies will sell themselves if they are good. Same thing with games, this push to turn a quick buck is just insulting to the games actual content. It would be like taking the mona lisa and putting a opacity shaded mcdonalds sign right in the middle of it, not to obvious but its there...

The first game I remember playing and seeing an advert in was WipeOut - ofcourse the big billboard for Red Bull didn't look out of place whizzing past at 200mph.

Adverts are only acceptable to me if they are a logical part of the game environment, eg walking about a city or in a racetrack. Unless the game developer is really struggling, I dont see how a few extra $$$can help the game quality- money doesn't give you ideas.

This is a case study in how you can manipulate the results by how you ask the questions. In politics it's known as "Push polling". I'd love to see the questions they asked to drive these responses.

That said, I hate advertising in all it's forms. I never buy anything from an ad online, and if I see something I like i research it and then buy it somewhere else (usually ebay). My bottom line is I don't like being told what to do, or even encouraged, and so when someone tries to sell me something I make a point of not buying from them.

BF2142 is about 10€ around here.... if you ask me it is pretty damn cheap....

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE
BF2142 is about 10€ around here.... if you ask me it is pretty damn cheap....

but how long has it been out? if it launched at that price then id say yes its down to advertising, but now its just because its an old game

Originally Posted by Cthippo
This is a case study in how you can manipulate the results by how you ask the questions. In politics it's known as "Push polling". I'd love to see the questions they asked to drive these responses.

That said, I hate advertising in all it's forms. I never buy anything from an ad online, and if I see something I like i research it and then buy it somewhere else (usually ebay). My bottom line is I don't like being told what to do, or even encouraged, and so when someone tries to sell me something I make a point of not buying from them.

I do exactly the same thing. My whole life I've always done the opposite of what I was told to do just because someone tried to force me. My parents knew that and were always cool and relaxed and I never caused them any problem :D

I do mind in-game ads.

Originally Posted by TreeDude
If done properly ads can actually make the game better. It is all about placement. BF2142 is a great example of ads done wrong. However sports games make perfect sense. What would an arena be without ads? It would look strange.

But they should bring the game cost down if using in game ads. I sure as hell do not want to play $60 for a game and have ads in it. that is just plain ridicules.

Or bring the quality up. There is a stigma attatched to paying more than the going rate for computer games - you would expect to pay £35 for a really crap game and a really good game in a shop. Doesn't make sense. Some games obviously have had more money put into them and are 'worth' more. If they add this extra content by recovering the cost through advertising revenue then great, or if you get a standard game that is subsidised because of ad revenue then again, great.

Originally Posted by Anakha
I'm sorry, where was the cheaper cost in Spider-Man? Or in BF2142? Or any of the other games that have had advertising thrown into them? Even being ad-supported, those games are still as expensive as their rivals on the store shelf.

Battlefield Heroes.

Originally Posted by Cthippo
That said, I hate advertising in all it's forms. I never buy anything from an ad online, and if I see something I like i research it and then buy it somewhere else (usually ebay). My bottom line is I don't like being told what to do, or even encouraged, and so when someone tries to sell me something I make a point of not buying from them.

I'm glad theres someone else with a similar viewpoint to me :)

I go out of my way to avoid advertising, i absolutely hate using any PC without adblock installed, i'd count it as one of the most important pieces of software on my PC now.

Away from the PC, theres a 95+% chance that any noticeable advertising will cause me to make an effort to never buy anything from them, the more annoying the advert the longer my memory for this gets

My particular pet hate is cold callers, thats an instant lifetime ban on ever buying anything from that company for me

I mind them

I think adds are ****ed, and avoid games that contain them. If a REALLY good game comes out with adds, I go out of my way to hack them out of said game.

Problem solved.