07-06-2004, 02:26 PM
|
#18
|
Pro
OVR: 5
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
|
Re: In Game Ads Should Mean a Game Discount
Quote:
ajaxab said:
So if I accept this argument that ads are fine in games if they make the game more 'realistic,' what happens when these 30 second ads become part of television coverage of college football? Do we accept these things in the name of realism and say that because it's in television coverage that it should be in the game? I just don't buy the realism argument when it comes to things like the Pontiac College Classics or the Old Spice Red Zone. There is no such thing as the Pontiac College Class in real life so how can the argument about realism be made?
There is also a difference between signage around a stadium and these in game ads like the Pontiac College Classic. I am willing to buy the realism argument when it comes to ads in and around stadiums or on the field if they do exist in real life. What I do not appreciate is the commercials like the Old Spice Red Zone that get tossed in to pad EA's already fat wallet.
Also, remember my original post. I am not opposed to ads in games per se, but think that if companies are going to insert ads in games, then we should expect that these products should be like television shows. We should either be getting them for free or at a discount.
"Pontiac High Performance Play"
"Player of The Game, Sponsored by Chevy"
Just two right off the top of my head that are in any major college football broadcast FOR SURE. Those add to the realism, it makes the game less generic. And, since it has no effect on how you play or how long it takes to load, etc. Why is it an issue?
They're not making a ton of money off of a 5 second advertisement when you get inside the 20 yardline, I can assure you that.
|
|
|