In-Game Ads Follow-Up

[CSN NewsBot]

MnWar.com has taken time to write up an article stating about possible wrong doings in Engage and Subway's advertising campaign.

When we enter the game of Counter-Strike and especially CS:Source, we enter a world unlike any other. A world that has some of the most realistic oppurtunities in gameplay. Now if we truely wanted to see the real thing in violence or people being killed, we'd pick up a movie or watch the local news. The same thing applies for that if we want to deal with commercials and advertisements. We'll open a magazine or look at the billboards while driving down the road. Well, not anymore. Engage In-Game Advertising has brought the marketing/advertising world to our computer screens, IN GAME.

You can check out the entire article at MnWar.com, entitled As if we weren't hungry enough?

[Zips]

There are a couple more interesting points brought up in the short examination of the dealings of Engage, but I'm going to have to disagree with a point they make.



To say that a server admin should have a choice is to say that they have no control currently over the content of what goes on their server. In this case, while it seems to be a bit unclear, the server admins do have control over what is introduced to the game server they are paying for. It appears as though this viral marketing is actually applauded by a small handful of game administrators. Do they actually receive kickbacks from this sort of advertisement deal? I'm not quite sure. The Engage site doesn't seem to have any package deals readily apparent to public scrutiny.



Despite how the in-game advertising may be supported by a few, and shunned by everybody else, it does not mean very much in the end. Why? Put yourself in the shoes of the game developers. In this particular case, those shoes are Valve's. From a business perspective they are receiving absolutely no benefit from other companies appearing in their game by means of Engage's in-game advertising. Why should any game company allow this sort of advertising to continue without any benefit or without any legal agreement? They shouldn't. For those uninformed, the appearance of ads in a game that shouldn't have any of those ads will generate a negative mindset about a game. It could actually push away players, customers, and future business if they believe that the game developers are the ones actually responsible.



To those who are still a little confused on the matter, it does not appear that Valve had any hand in the in-game advertisements for Counter-Strike, as noted by how Valve is actively seeking information on servers running this service.

[AzN_PrOPh3t]

I think that the idea of seeing ingame ads for places such as subway will take away the seriousness of CS. It taints the experience of CS. Honestly, the thought of seeing an ad for subway on dust2 is rather disturbing.

[RedSquirrelJJ]

Obviously In game advertising will happen eventually. It's already been tested at several levels by marketers and in advertising research. I'm sorry that I can't remember the particular artice I read this information in (or I'd cite the source), but it was found that if the ad is intrusive and out of place, it tended to give the player a negative impression on the product whereas if the ad was used in part of the game appropriately, then it was beneficial to both parties. Advertisers got their product advertised and players gained a "more realistic" experience. How cool would it be to see an actual Pepsi machine in Half life instead of the generic boring cola machines littered everywhere? There is that fine line that should not be crossed. The picture showing the subway ad is way out of place (color scheme, size, etc). I think that with enough rounds most players would avoid Subway like the plague. I'll make an edit if I can find the links.



Edit: Sorry, but I also wanted to make my point. This system still runs on a capitalistism, no matter how far from reality the games actually are. This is why I say that ingame advertising will stick. Servers need to cover costs too. But on the flip side. If advertisements are annoying, I can foresee negative reactions from gamers and, in turn, servers alike. This is what will keep the advertisements in check.

[-:Nighthawk:-]

Yeah, this article seems to come from the perspective of believing this is something that Engage is adding to CS as a game. Clearly this is not the case, and rather a few server admins have chosen to place Engage's advertisements within their personal CS servers. As such, the "article" (or two-paragraph opinion post, call it what you may) really misses the mark entirely in my opinion, and quite frankly I didn't really gain anything from reading it.



In terms of licensing, this whole discussion brings up an interesting point. VALVe's interest in this matter, as Zips already pointed out, probably is along a similar vein as their cybercafé program. That is, making a profit from VALVe's software is not allowed by the standard licensing. One then has to wonder if VALVe could in theory sue server admins, hosting companies, and/or Engage for possible violations or conspiricy to violate license agreements.



It's an interesting legal question, really. What's you guy's take on it?



RedSquirrelJJ, the article you're refering to was the Yahoo news post.

[sugii]

If valve were to even think about putting ads into counter-strike I think the whole ad placement should be revised. Having an out of place, out of theme, out of this world ad in the middle of de_dust2 would just completely ruin the game for me.



Say I'm looking at a giant sub sandwitch in the background through the scopes of my awp, the tender cold cut trio could remind me of how hungry I actually am then...BOOM HEADSHOT. Just another distraction.



And besides, I'm a quiznos man myself.

[RedSquirrelJJ]

Nighthawk, thanks from helping me out the link, though not exactly the article I was looking for. I suppose you're right about the licensing. This would mean I think that it would have to be Valve who could choose if advertising could be used and what ads are chosen. Since Valve has a reputation to uphold, it could be very much in the gamer's favor, especially for future games should Valve still have the last say over ingame advertising in their games.



Edit: And amen to Quizno's :p

[-:Nighthawk:-]

RedSquirrelJJ, were you possibly referring to Engage's website which also states the same thing?



I'm not opposed to all in-game advertising, but I think we all agree that out-of-place advertising is annoying. The kind of advertising that goes on in movies, for instance, doesn't typically bother me unless the director goes out of his way to get a close-up on the product.



So if I'm running around an indoor office complex and see a Pepsi or Coke machine instead of LiteraCola, it's not going to bother me, so long as I can still shoot it. Likewise if I drive whatever new car BMW or Mercedes is currently selling in my racing game, that's also not going to bother me. If I see a banner on the walls for a friggin' sandwich while playing CS, though, it's going to bother me.



I'd like to think that Engage has enough intelligent employees that they'll recognize this not-so-subtle difference, and work more as a liason between game developers and advertisers for a mutually positive relationship, rather than trying to inject things that the developers never intended. Otherwise it's more or less like broadcasting a pirate signal to people's televisions that shows advertising that the broadcast company is not receiving pay for -- something I can't see being allowed to continue indefinitely.

[Ryosuke T]

whatever.... it's whack but oh well. i think we can all look thru this.

[videege]

Somehow I think Valve will take legal action against this, as it is obviously against the TOS.



Maybe we should organize and send a petition of support to Valve, they might start believing there is a god again.

[Sava]

I don't know if this idea hasn't been discussed or not...



But I would support advertising in-game if it somehow made the cost of renting or operating servers less or even free. And then perhaps in the server browser you could sort whether or not you wanted to play on servers with ads or not.



Seems like a cool way to let more people operate servers. As long as you are willing to put up with ads. I don't really mind the idea of ads in the game as long as they are put in places that aren't terribly offensive. Like say... the pop machines in office... or existing signage in other maps. There are places that advertising could be placed that would not be terribly distracting in-game. I'm sure there would be a way to work this out where advertising companies would be satisfied enough that their ads were reaching their audience enough so that we could get free servers out of the deal.



And I'm sure there's a way to work this out with Valve.

[VuLLrath]

with all the hackers and bull crap in cs, i dont expect the ads to be much of a threat, I mean the hackers will find a way to get them off our screens so we can headshot clear and lag free with no stupid pop ups.



>:)



btw, i wish the guys that made cs 1.5 would come back and take control over cs 1.6 and cs source and get the idiots that are ruining the game out of office. who ever made condition zero failed at life. and now ads... gg k thnx.

[DeAceShooter]

VuLLrath wrote..

btw, i wish the guys that made cs 1.5 would come back and take control over cs 1.6 and cs source and get the idiots that are ruining the game out of office. who ever made condition zero failed at life. and now ads... gg k thnx.

Sorry to spoil your dream, the team that made 1.5 made 1.6 and Source.



Besides, Valve has already shown that it had not known about these incidents, and now are looking for more information regarding them.

[Scanner]

There were eyebrows raised when ads and spam first intruded onto the Web, so it doesn't surprise me when the same questions are asked about Counter-Strike. "Hey, this isn't the real world, is it?"



Speaking for myself, the immersiveness of the experience would be lost upon seeing a paid advertisement on the game. I do my best to keep spam out of my inbox and use popup blockers and image blockers on my web browser, as they spoiled my enjoyment of the Internet, so I wouldn't be surprised at all if I removed a server from my favorites the moment I saw an unwanted advertisement there, too.



And it's not just me. I'm flat-out telling you right now that it's a flawed business model that will not work on a large contingent of the gaming population, just based upon the patently-obvious fact that that significant percentage plays games as some minimal form of escapism from the real world. As advertisements become more pervasive and intrusive, those gamers leave the game, and the target audience becomes smaller and smaller. Any advertising investment would be a losing proposition over time! If I were a company, I certainly wouldn't be wasting my advertising budget that way...



And it doesn't surprise me that Valve has gotten interested and is actively pursuing servers using this form of advertising. Licensing questions aside, they're probably curious to study the population trends on the servers in order to predict how much revenue they could lose from gamers that stay away. Negative press and the threat of population decline caused Valve to expend enormous effort on anti-cheats, and in-game advertising fits the same bill as far as I can tell.



--Scanner

[Deletable_Man]

I remember when I used to see popups and banner ads on the Internet. Man, good times.