What the market will bear

If the shoe fits

One thing that I've tried to hammer home in this article is the point that advertising has a place. Different ads are chosen in different places for different reasons, and as long as that diversity continues then the games themselves should have little reason to suffer.

In light of this, there are a few games that could genuinely benefit from IGA, and a couple types that could really stand to be left out of the inevitable gold rush. Advertising permeates our modern-day world, and maybe that's the best place for it.

One game that definitely wouldn't be hurt is the Grand Theft Auto Series. GTA is a perfect place for some great dynamic advertising. The game thrives on a warped twist of a very real world, making it an excellent candidate for some real (but twisted) advertising. Some online games are also good choices, particularly ones focusing on real-world imitation like Second Life.

On the other hand, games set in either the future or the past aren't really going to make great advertising laden games, though there have been some novel adaptations. For instance, World of Warcraft isn't about to benefit from movie posters - but it could always use the same Pizza Hut delivery service that the original Everquest had. Now if only there was a beer delivery service...

And the Future...

With some of the benefits to IGA and the understanding that big brother isn't really watching you (at least yet), it maybe doesn't seem like quite the same villain that it did before. The truth is, no matter what, in-game advertising is here to stay - but its acceptance by the gaming community will have a lot to do with how long it remains trustworthy.

For now, IGA collects little information and doesn't really strive to be intrusive - in fact, it tries not to be. Though we're not seeing a reduction in the cost of games, those same games are getting more development time without the price going up. On top of that, it can provide the developers with beneficial feedback for level design.

The most exciting thing, however, is the risk metric. The payments afforded thanks to IGA can allow more games to be released without requiring them all to be multi-system commercial blockbusters. Dynamic advertising can help create funding to sustain support and development for long-standing franchises, while static advertisements can provide much-needed cash boosts to smaller, riskier titles.

Of course, like all technologies, it is just as ripe for exploitation.

What I haven't covered in this article is the potential misuse of the technology as a whole. Aside from the very realistic possibility that the advertising could turn obtrusive, the data mined by these smaller companies is nowhere near as secure as the Fort Knox level protection provided to us by major search engines like Google or Yahoo!. If the data collection were to increase serendipitously, there is not the same assurance that protection of it would also increase.

Another aspect of IGA is disclosure. The stunt (for lack of a better word) pulled by Electronic Arts over the BF:2142 advertising is a great way to lose the trust of the gaming community as a whole, and it did some pretty serious damage to the credibility of the companies choosing to use the tech. The backlash from failures like this could help force advertising out of the industry again for another few years, waiting for more mainstream consumers who are willing to (or even want to) tolerate it.

All in all, in-game advertising is much like any basic technology. It has the potential to help games remain affordable, diverse, and more realistic - but it's not without its potential pitfalls. Which future will it realize, one of rejection and contempt or acceptance and tolerance by the gaming community? What will the market bear? Only time will tell.