PSN Ad Mocks X Box Live

Yesturday i discussed the ways in which Sony is planning to integrate ads within their upcoming social network Home, as a way to keep both the new service and the old online services. One of the PS3's strongest selling points has always been its free online play, which competes with the X Box live service in which subscribers have to pay $50 a year. A new ad for PSN appears to be mocking the X Box live service, stating in the ad "the fun is always free"

What is most siginificant about the story isnt the details of the story itself, yet rather the way gamers and fanboys react when information like this is brought to light. Reading the comments on the original blog post, it is obvious to see which gamers support microsoft and xbox, and which gamers are in the corner with Sony and Playstation 3. This trend can be seen whenever a debate between PS3 and Xbox is reported anywhere. PS3 supporters will laud Sony for keeping online play free, and crucify Microsoft for charging more even after the game has been purchased. Supporters of Microsoft will express how $50 a year is such a small fee to pay for the content Microsoft provides, and that they would rather pay $50 than o be stuck with the online content Sony offers.

As with any irrational debate, it seems impossible to argue who is actually right. As a college student i am inclined to say i support Sony because of their free online content. The $50 however may not be such a big deal once i am out of school and no longer, for lack of a better word, poor. It is amusing to see how passionate gamers can get about their respective systems when someone calls the features of that system into question.

Playstation Home

Playstation 3 owners such as myself have eagerly awaiting the release of the virtual world Playstation Home for quite some time now. The free world will provider gamers with new ways to interact and socialize, and is expected to be released sometime in 2008.

With the establishment of a new in house ad agency at SCEA, Sony is hoping to bring in extra revenues from the Playstation Network and services such as Home. The new unit will be responsible for advertising strategies across all of playstations platforms. Darlene Kindler, previously the VP of Adscape publishing, will be in charge as Director of Network Advertising. With the use of Home, the ads could be delivered as virtual walls in a room, or even feature videos of upcoming games. With the great deal of flexibility provided to advertisers within a virtual world, there are numerous possibilities as to how the content may be delivered.

As a proud playstation 3 owner I have always been excited at the prospect of home and have recognized the potential it has to create a gaming community. The placement of ads within Home makes sense since it is a very segmented audience (playstation 3 owners) so the ads can be very narrowly tailored. Ads will also ensure that this service remains free, which is something playstaion has always supported. This is in contrast to Xbox Live where subscribers need to pay $50 a year just to access online features and play games online. I am intrigued to see the type of content that Sony's advertising strategies come up with, and also to see how they integrate it into a part of the world of Home.

Video Game Ads for Kids

Children have an enormous amount of influence over their parents. It can be seen everywhere from a child throwing a temper tantrum in the toy store to the types of movies families go to see on the weekends. With that said, Cookie Jar is looking to integrate kid focused ads into their upcoming MMORPG, Magi-Nation: Battle for the Moonlands. The game, which is based of the Kids! WB show Magi-Nation, signed an agreement with GoFish, a company that will be providing the in game ads to children. Ken Locker, Senior Vice President of Digital Media at Cookie Jar, is confident that these ads will have a great impact.

Ken Locker states some people refer to the power of children in the household as the "nag factor" Yet he comes back and states that he sees kids as influencers. He further explains that when you advertise to kids you are marketing to both the kids and their parents. The kids have a limited disposable income while they can in addition, as mention, influence the purchases of the household. Cookie Jar has previously introduced banner ads into their free online titles, yet this is the first time that the games will be integrated into the game. Ken Locker stated the proposed benefit of integrated ads by stating "...If the ads are contextual, they're less objectionable. ... Kids seem to accept it."

I have never been against advertising in games, especially if it makes the game free. I respect the right of aadvertisers to put their ads in games so long as they dont interfere with the gameplay. In this case however i do have concerns about whether it is ethical or not to integrate ads into a game that is meant for children. With a demographic of 8-14 year olds, Cooki Jar will in essence be advertising to a very young age group. This kids are very impressionable so the effects that the ads may have on them may be greater than that of an adult. Advertising to children has always been a hot ethical debate in terms of television, and i wonder if any debate has arisen concern video game ads as well. Whatever the case, i was pleased to see the message that Cookie Jar will not be promoting any unhealthy foods to kids. Ethically, i think that is a step in the right direction.

Ads Dont's Equal Cheaper Games

One of the strongest arguments supporters of video game advertising have been making is that extra revenue from advertising dollars will ultimately reduce development cost which will be translated to cheaper games. It appears however Electronic Arts Senior Director of in game advertising, Shebly Cox, does not believe in this logic. Electronic Arts has multiple sports and driving franchises, and they have been credited with bringing in game ads to the players without being overly intrusive. Yet despite their use ads their games still run thr full $60 at retail. In a phone interview with Next-Gen, she was quoted as saying "Advertising is not going to be that silver bullet to make everything okay".

That isnt to say that the revenue from in game advertising does not help with costs. However, she explains that next generation development costs are astronomical and that advertising dollars arent going to magically make things ok. Combating development costs will require then finding multiple solutions to the same problem, not just the in game advertising solution. So it seems that in the effort to bring cheaper games to consumers, new strategies will have to be implemented in addition to advertsing in games.

What these means for gamers like me is that we should continue to expect to be paying $60 for console games, despite how many ads developers choose to place in the game. The only time advertising truly benefits games are in the pc market, with free-to-play online MMOs. In situations such as those the games are allowed to be free thanks to the advertiments and virtual item purchases, however on the home console market, these model does not apply.



With record sales in the video game industry in 2007, consumers, myself included, dont seem to mind the steep prices because of the entertainment value of the games. However if prices continue to rise there may be a point where consumers may react and the sale of games declines because of the high prices. Hopefully soon publishers like EA will find other ways to cut costs and then consumers can enjoy quality games for under $60.

No matter how many advertisements these games may have, they will still cost $60.

Most Despicable Use of In-Game Advertising

Very few stories ever acurately capture the way hard core gamers feel about in game advertisements. Sure there are surveys and statistics about attitudes towards adsthat are often reported, but as most people know, any statistics can be manipulated. It would be impossible to precisely measure every gamers opinion about in game advertisments, and it would differ for different games. That being said, gamespot.com, a site for game industry news, recently featured it's best of 2007 year end awards. Among the awards handed out was the award for Most Despicable Use of In-Game Advertising. Visitors to the site participated in the vote which decided which game would take home the (dis)honor. In addition, editors of the site chose their own "winner" of this award.

The description of the award describes videogame advertising as "one of the worst trends to appear in the world of videogames". It recognized the need for advertising in video games in order to cout costs, but describes a point where the ads go from being acceptable to ruinin gthe video game experience. Gamers voted on 5 titles :Guitar Hero III, Need For Speed: Pro Street, Skate, Tabula Rasa, and All Pro Football 2K8. Gamers voted with a majority 56% that Guitar Hero III should take the award. Editors of the site differed choosing Need for Speed as their winner.

Which ever game truly deserves the award is irrelvant to the idea behind this award category. Having this as an award implys something about the way gamers, notably hardcore gamers, may truly feel about in game advertising. There is a line that many game developers should be aware of when making their games, that gamers perceive that there is a point where in game advertisements can go to far.

Having not played any of these games i cannot say whether i agree or disagree with the voters or the editors, but i can say i have had similar experiences. Playing Fight Night Round 3 for the first time i realized that this game may have taken the advertisements a little too far. Logos were plastered everywhere from the loading screens to the boxing ring itself. Even the announcers in the game mentioned products and slogans. I would argue that it definately took away from the game experience and that is something developers need to be aware of.