Advergames != In-Game ads
It’s always interesting to me how loosely everyone defines various terms that are “standard” in the industry. One of the most commonly used (and abused) terms is advergames, and it’s simply amazing how many people think in-game ads are the same thing as an advergame.
While they both serve the same basic purpose, they go about it in a very different way. In order to help clear up this confusion I think it’s useful to define both terms:
Advergame: An advergame is a title that’s built around a brand. This is almost always custom work, that in an ideal situation completely integrates the brand or brand messaging into the game experience. When done correctly it should be nearly impossible to separate the brand or product from the gameplay and still be left with the same experience. A couple examples of this are The Passenger where the GPS unit is integral to navigating the Paris city streets, or Retroville Rescue where it’s as much about experiencing the Jimmy Neutron world as it is about completing the game.
In-Game Advertising: Incorporating advertisements into an otherwise complete game. In their best form, these advertisements may be somewhat related to the gameplay such as drinking a branded soda to increase health, but are more often simply banners placed within an environment. Sometimes the branding adds credibility to the gameworld, such as billboards on a sports stadium, though the game is almost always completely unrelated to the branding. In fact the branding will typically be changed dynamically so the in-game advertising is interchangeable without affecting gameplay.
To compare these more succinctly, you could say that with In-Game Advertising the advertiser is simply choosing games as the medium for their media buy. With an advergame the advergame itself IS the media.
Both of these have their place, and can be very effective ways to reach a captive audience. The key is determining when it makes sense just to dump branding into a game world, and when you can make more of an impact and better engage the user by creating an entire experience around the branding.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 22nd, 2007 at 4:22 pm and is filed under Branded Entertainment. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
August 23rd
2007 at 5:39 pm
I hear you… but I think you’re simply splitting a single concept (advergaming) into two more detailed definitions. This IGDA_CasualGames_Whitepaper_2006.pdf defines advergames as:
Advergaming is loosely defined as “the use of games to deliver advertising messages, drive
traffic to web sites, and build brand awareness.”
I do think it makes sense to be more clear–but I think if your game simply has a rectangle billboard and you decide to swap that out with advertising… and the game is not charged to the user… then it is (by definition) an advergame. Maybe instead of calling it “in-game advertising” (which is accurate) you could call what you’re calling advergame something like “customized product placement”. Whatever, I do think it’s worth separating the two, but I think one could argue what counts as “advergame”. (My personal definition is a game that is funded entirely by any form of in-game advertising.)
August 25th
2007 at 2:07 pm
To me, in-game ads should be called “gamer-tising”. The game has nothing to do with the ad or the product and is merely a means of communicating to a gamer; hence gamer-tising. Kind of like in Winning Eleven 8 on my PC; I see billboards around the pitch with various ads from real companies.
August 25th
2007 at 2:08 pm
I probably should have said “the game usually has nothing to do with the ad or the product..”.
August 25th
2007 at 3:35 pm
Philip: I see where you’re going with the first part, but I disagree. The definition that we put in the Casual Games White Paper was fairly good, but not quite as concise as I’d like it to be, and I think that’s part of the reason we have so much confusion.
I don’t feel that In-Game Advertising is the same thing as advergaming. If that were true then you’d have to say that almost every single console game coming out these days was an advergame simply because they have ad placement in them. They are somewhat related in that both use games to deliver advertising but the implementation is vastly different from both a production and a media buy/results point of view.
Stodge: I like the “gamer-tising” terminology
August 26th
2007 at 8:13 pm
I guess all that I’m saying is that there’s already a definition for “advergame” and it may be easiest to subdivide and extend it, rather than re-define it to fit something different than its original definition.
Also, you can get really creative to make simple “in-game advertising” seem quite customized. Whatever–it’s not like I’m trying to equate something as simple as in-game billboards with a game customized 100% for a particular client. I’m just saying it’s a term that has been defined already.
August 27th
2007 at 8:18 am
You’ve hit the whole point of my post
It’s something that’s been loosely defined for years, but over the past several months I’ve seen more and more people try to co-opt the term to include in-game ads as well. That’s not what it has historically included, and the confusion that I’m seeing more and more often now is the result of a lack of clarity.
To a similar extent we’re seeing the same sort of thing happen now with casual games where the new (and bigger players) are trying to co-opt the term to mean more than it has for the last few years. I’ll probably have more on that in another post …
August 30th
2007 at 8:14 am
I think the definition is pretty straight forward, but the general use is the problem. For example, the word “hacker” has several meanings depending on who is doing the talking. If the source is news media, the connotation is most probable negative, while if the setting is PAX or MIT, then it is quite a compliment.
In terms of use of both types, I think the target audience can be refined by using in-game advertising, but runs the risk of being missed / ignored. However, the audience of a popular franchise, Madden for example, can more than make up for the less than prime placement. I would be more interested in seeing the results and popular use of each type than debating strict definitions. Influencing usage will have more impact than trying to nail down verbiage around the word and being ignored anyway.
August 30th
2007 at 8:38 am
Great point John, and it’s funny that you mention Madden as the example. I just played the 360 demo of Madden last night and there was a HUGE amount of in-game ads shown. I haven’t played Madden for a couple of iterations and was simply amazed by how in your face they are now.
August 30th
2007 at 10:25 am
They are following the NFL’s model from TV. Any free space is ads.
Just imagine if they open it up to interactivity! Pause your game, click on the ad and order your pizza, all from the comfort of your couch / chair and without taking your hands off the controller. Consumer utopia is coming!
October 4th
2007 at 9:27 am
John: Ha ha! Something I’d never thought of, but now see the possibilities. It’s not something I would do or be interested in suffering (i.e. more ads just to be able to click in game to download a pizza), but that’s the way things are heading. Though it’s possible the extra ads would help finance the game industry. Buy the full price with no ads for $100 or the $15 version with lots of ads.
October 4th
2007 at 9:48 am
Stodge: It’d be great if it were a tradeoff, but I think the reality is going to be more like the Madden model, where they keep putting in more and more ads, but never reduce the price as a result.
October 15th
2007 at 6:50 pm
Ok so I think I might have missed the boat on this discussion, but after reading this post I gave some serious thought to how advergamer are the same as traditional games.
I have to admit that I had always thought of advergames as these little toy games that had no real value at all, let alone contributing anything to the industry. (Yeah, goes to show you just how in the dark I was!) This view has changed since Brian Robbin’s visit to Algoma U in Sault Ste. Marie, after his presentation on the casual and advergame space in the industry. After that presentation I will admit that the notion of advergames really didn’t enter my mind that much until I discovered this post.
So the short and sweet of this comment is this:
According to the gents over at the Experimental Gameplay Project, a criterion for an experimental game is to be centered around one central idea, be it gravity, swarms, etc. This turns out to be precisely what advergames are all about! Take the experimental game Tower of Goo for example. The central idea here is gravity. Now look at Fuel’s Mr. Reach in the Mouth of Mystery. The central idea here is the Reach product line. And as Gus Portokalos would say in My Big Fat Greek Wedding … “You see: advergame, game. There you go.”
Yes arguably all games are centered around one central idea, but most traditional games are centered around many