211 Replies. 11 pages. Viewing page 7.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older >
 |
| 91. |
Re: Inflamatory comparisons anyone? |
Jun 20, 2007, 02:16 |
DarkCntry |
|
|
Always good to see the viral marketers put in an appearence and tell us how wrong we all are and should go happily to the abbatoir of in-game advertising with nary a bleat.
Ah yes...when someone disagrees with the sentiment of the elitist, they are paid voices.
God forbid someone with free will has a differing opinion of another person! Especially when they make such grandiose statements such as the ones above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 90. |
Re: Inflamatory comparisons anyone? |
Jun 20, 2007, 02:12 |
Cutter |
|
|
Always good to see the viral marketers put in an appearence and tell us how wrong we all are and should go happily to the abbatoir of in-game advertising with nary a bleat.
It's just so sad to see some people whose sould have been wholly consumed by mass-consumerism. They should watch What Would Jesus Buy. There's a slight possibility they might learn the evils of rampant consumerism and possibly get their souls back in the process.
It is my deepest wish that this game fails horribly on the sales front because of this. Let gamers and those of who still have souls send a message to the marketing whores of the world that we don't want this sort of crap.
People never had a choice with TV before untill the VHS, and now DVR where you can bypass commercials entirely. People have always hated ads, they just didn't have a choice. Now they do. Choose not to accept them.
"Spank you, Helpy Helperton."
- Ace Ventura |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "Are you crazy? Is that your problem?" - Jack Burton |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 89. |
No subject |
Jun 20, 2007, 02:09 |
Beaner |
|
|
This will become more common. Im not really thrilled, BUT I understand why they are doing it. We are all so jaded to the amount of work and effort that goes into these very sophisticated games. Its not like this is Pac Man and they are putting ads in the game. These games are exhaustively expensive to make these days. Companies have to make money.
As long as the Ads are not intrusive, just some random graphics on billboards or some objects in the game no big deal. At least this will still be a gamers game and not another marketing piece of crap. I hope.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 88. |
Activision gives gamers more choice |
Jun 20, 2007, 02:02 |
Entr0py24 |
|
|
I for one am thrilled that they'll be offering a free ad-sponsored version of the game. After their pay-for-beta fileplanet stunt I was a bit worried, but this makes up for it completely. And once people have a chance to try out the game, I'm sure it won't be long before they opt to buy the full commercial-free version. This is the sort of bold experiment more publishers should try.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 87. |
vampire mascaraed |
Jun 20, 2007, 01:56 |
Daturan |
|
|
thank goodness for all those adds keeping vampire mascaraed patches going over all these years!! Proving that in game adds are the ONLY way to keep the dream alive,, smell that? it's the rotting corps of what use to be a passionate PC game industry... off to play Savage, tremulous, legends,, etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 86. |
Re: Inflamatory comparisons anyone? |
Jun 20, 2007, 01:51 |
sponge |
|
|
is "stat tracking" reason enough to justify the need for an extra revenue stream beyond that of sales at retail
Stat-tracking alone is not reason. If SD can provide better post-release support than they could before thanks to it, then great. SD aren't a big company like Epic, where they can afford to crank out extra content.
If they come through with it, then great. If they don't then next time around I won't be willing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 85. |
Re: Inflamatory comparisons anyone? |
Jun 20, 2007, 01:50 |
Howin |
|
|
I hope UT3 doesn't jump on this bandwagon. I am running out of FPS to buy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 84. |
Re: Inflamatory comparisons anyone? |
Jun 20, 2007, 01:47 |
Prez |
|
|
Mindtrigger:
Well, I'm not one of the angry ones. File me under "disappointed". Your question is still valid, though.
As a rule, I stay away from games with monthly fees because they act as artificial motivation to play a game I would have otherwise moved on from. Sure I could cancel, but then there's no point in having ever bought the game, is there? So I'm sure I would just end up twittling away at WOW or LOTR Online just to get my money's worth for the month rather than play a game that I truly "own" in the sense that I only had to pay for it once, and can experience whenever I wanted on my own terms.
In that respect, I view a game with in-game advertising on the same level as one with a monthly fee. Except that I can actually understand there being a reason for the monthly fee in persistent world MMO's and the like. In the case of ET:QW, is "stat tracking" reason enough to justify the need for an extra revenue stream beyond that of sales at retail? How is it that games can avoid using advertisements and still not only remain up and running, but undergo near constant improvement as is the case with "Guild Wars"?
Like I said, I can't for the life of me understand this decision.
This comment was edited on Jun 20, 01:47. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 83. |
Ugh... |
Jun 20, 2007, 01:44 |
TylarJ |
|
|
I dont agree what so ever with in-game-advertising, I believe its intrusive no matter what it is. However I do know that both id and Splash Damage are great companies and I cannot see either of them allowing advertising to go too far. Im sure the ads that will be in the game will be tasteful, and not to the extent of say television or radio.
"All they track is if and how long you look at the advertisements."
Great, well then how about wasted processing power on tracking this? Processing power isnt necessarily cheap now days. Granted, Im sure we dont need to upgrade our computers because of this alone, but come on... Put the ads in the game, track how many people are in a specific level and how much that level is played, not how much we look at an ad.
Their choice in including advertisements in the game wont persuade me to buy, or not to buy the game. However I agree with most of you here, they should not be in it. Theres better ways to make the money in order to include long term support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 82. |
No subject |
Jun 20, 2007, 01:43 |
Malvok |
|
|
People talk about how much this game will cost to maintain but how much of this ad money will go to the independent server admins who really support games like this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 81. |
Re: Inflamatory comparisons anyone? |
Jun 20, 2007, 01:35 |
MindTrigger |
|
|
Prez,
Wouldn't you be even more angry if there was a monthly fee to play? I think you need to look into what these games cost to maintain. This isn't quake 2...ship it and forget it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
He cut the possum's face off then cut around the eye socket. In the center of the belt buckle, where the possum's eye would be, he has placed a small piece of wood from his old '52 Ford's home made railroad tie bumper. Damn, he misses that truck. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 80. |
Re: Inflamatory comparisons anyone? |
Jun 20, 2007, 01:33 |
MindTrigger |
|
|
Yeah, I don't see the problem with this if the ads are just part of the environment and make sense in the context of the game's maps. After all, any seasoned FPS player ignores 99% of the visuals once they have seen them a couple times. They just become landmarks for the most part or blend into the immersive atmosphere. I doubt I will really even notice the ads much, but they might make the maps seem visually richer in a general way. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
He cut the possum's face off then cut around the eye socket. In the center of the belt buckle, where the possum's eye would be, he has placed a small piece of wood from his old '52 Ford's home made railroad tie bumper. Damn, he misses that truck. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 79. |
Re: Another Lost Sale |
Jun 20, 2007, 01:23 |
Prez |
|
|
I haven't seen any real "freaking out", contrary to what some have said about this thread. What I have seen is a great deal of disappointment and a bit of anger, too. Hey, If you aren't bothered by the in-game ads, or more to the point, the very concept of in-game ads, then more power to you. Me, I think the whole concept just stinks. I absolutely want developers and publishers to get a return on their investment of making the game, but I just think that annoying the crap out of a huge portion of your potential fan-base is the wrong way to go about it.
And I would love to go to the beach and get a better "perspective on life", but all of the billboards along the boardwalk would really get me all fired up again!
This comment was edited on Jun 20, 01:24. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 78. |
Re: Inflamatory comparisons anyone? |
Jun 20, 2007, 00:26 |
JD |
|
|
Own a cable box? No, and that is one reason why so you are not telling me something I don't already know.
This comment was edited on Jun 20, 02:45. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 77. |
No subject |
Jun 20, 2007, 00:24 |
DarkCntry |
|
|
I love the whole attitude of "if it has ads, I want it free!"
I'd love to know in what utopia you live in that you expect the ad count to be synonymous with the cost to develop the product. If we were to use a similar method of the click-thru system like most websites, then you'd have to literally see an ad on everything you ran across to even equate to 5% of development costs these days.
There's the standard 'visitors' type, where websites are paid based upon general traffic, click or no click. These lessen the ads, but in turn pay less due to no guarantee the ads will be utilized.
So, how do games do it? Generally in every game that I have noticed real-world advertisements, they go upon the basis of a more general traffic type, but to a far lesser degree. For example, Splinter Cell series, I could easily count on one hand the amount of ads I blatantly saw. In BF2142 I can remember the exact count of ads I saw in that game...5, yes, just 5. Kinda doesn't seem all that intrusive to me. I even laughed when I played NFSU, which was inundated with ads to the point you'd see one at every corner, but did it really phase me any? No...as it just felt like driving down the street.
Oh yea, let's get the whole "but they track us" conspirators going. Sure, they may track you, but what will they be tracking? Oh lets see, logically they'll be tracking where your IP originates in the world, how long you proceed to be in-game, and to what degree you are within an area that ads take place. Beyond that, there is absolutely nothing they can track you with that websites cannot do the same (even using your ever beloved proxies).
I'm sorry, I see this as a non-issue at best. Sure, advertisements are rather annoying having to deal with...but it is just the progression of the times. More and more of the population are spending their time playing games, therefor it would seem logical that ad agencies and products would push to get some information to a target audience.
Oh well...here comes the flames.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 76. |
Re: No subject |
Jun 20, 2007, 00:23 |
JD |
|
|
There's this retardedly simple concept of blocking the ads, considering it will be an ad server delivering them. There are two big potential problems with this. First on a technical level, how is the game going to react to this blocking? You do realize that it could be written to refuse online play if the ad and tracking servers are unreachable especially when the master list server still is. Or network performance could be noticeably affect as the game repeatedly retries to send and receive the ad information to/from the blocked hosts. Second, there is the legal issue. Blocking the ads and tracking could be made a violation of the EULA which could result in a ban of the game's CD key/account.
Blocking the ads is no more a viable solution to the problem than not buying the game and downloading a hacked copy of the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 75. |
... |
Jun 20, 2007, 00:22 |
theyarecomingforyou |
|
|
Why the hell i am gonna pay $US55 or more for a game and see stupid in game Adds!!!!!! Because the spiraling cost of game development / promotion needs to be recovered somehow. Some of the big games cost as much as $20m to make - that means selling 400,000 games at $50 to break even. Then you have to factor in maintenance for multiplayer games like ET:QW. Charging $100 is out of the question, so it comes down to pay monthly or in-game ads. I'd much rather look at a few ads that are appropriate than pay monthly or pay more for games as I can choose whether to buy that product or ignore it. I am already subjected to advertising throughout my day - a few ads in a computer game make no difference to me.
I'd much rather not have adverts in games but the reality of the situation is that with increasing development costs this was inevitable. If placed well I think they could add to the gaming environment. If adverts are used poorly then I'd support a boycott but if the developer / publisher tries to integrate them into the game experience then I support it. I have no objection to other people boycotting games with ads, as if you feel strongly about it then you should act out. I respect that other people disagree with me.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Founder of the "I Hate Smiley Fitz" society
Remember: Riley has autism. He has trouble communicating, and in an overstimulating
environment, he can get frightened and run away, leaving his parents frantic. - Auburn |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Core i7 2600-K (4.6GHz) | 12GB DDR3 | GTX680 SLI (1215/1605) | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB SSD | Windows 8 Pro
Hazro HZ30Wie 30" | Saffire PRO 40 | Razer Mamba | Coolermaster RP1000W
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 74. |
Re: Here we go again. |
Jun 20, 2007, 00:21 |
nomar |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 73. |
Re: Inflamatory comparisons anyone? |
Jun 20, 2007, 00:18 |
random.thought |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 72. |
Re: Here we go again. |
Jun 20, 2007, 00:14 |
Beamer |
|
|
Advertising is never "unobtrusive." You'll always notice it.
Sure it is.
EA did it amazingly in Def Jam: Fight for NY.
All of the ads fit the game. And none were obtrusive. One level was a subway station. The station had three billboards in the background, one when the action was to the left, one when the action was to the right, and one in the middle there all the time. The left and right ones were Axe ads, put in perfectly to match the surroundings. The middle one was blank.
In another part of the game you saw a Stuff Magazine hanging on the wall. It was almost instantly covered with a menu.
All the other name brands in the game fit the theme.
I can't applaud the advertising in that game enough. Nothing bothersome at all.
Compare that to SSX: Tricky where an entire level was so dedicated to some shitty car that you actually snowboarded through it. Not a single frame was lacking the car name. That game got tossed.
I'll gleefully boycot games that take advertising too far. I'll gleefully support those that are restrained. I think advertising has a place in games, but the devs can't let it become the game.
That said, this idea sucks. I'll do the beta for this game, but I can no longer see a purchase happening. As everyone has mentioned, it's the future. Even if you're doing it that these are ads from before the world went to hell it sucks. Have some fun making interesting futuristic ads, don't give us random shit.
-------------
Doomriders: the first new band worth a signature - http://www.deathwishinc.com/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
211 Replies. 11 pages. Viewing page 7.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
